Jump to content

Political Poker Hand: Bluff Called, Hypocrisy Folded

Kyle

By Kyle
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Blotto

Blotto 23432

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

You’re a fucking idiot, Kyle.

Which is what makes this comment so perfect

28 minutes ago, Kyle said:

Everyone seems so convinced I'm [insert whatever ad hom you want] yet no one seems to be able to support that assertion. That's what was IMHO genius about the move - it totally exposed the racism and hypocrisy

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TornACL

TornACL 7675

Posted
Posted

Kyle's having trouble connecting the dots. Why am I not surprised?

Part of the problem is that Kyle can't see the distinction between different types of illegal immigration - - Asylum seekers, border jumpers, and existing residents who came here, and/or who live here, illegally. 

A healthy and robust immigration policy, developed by actual leaders would both protect the nation's borders while also being reasonable and humane. 

Sadly, we've fallen so far into the abyss that we're in desperate need of a humane immigration policy. That's fucking embarrassing and pathetic for a country that likes to tout itself as the best. 

As a final note, Kyle, I'd advise you to understand what Sanctuary City actually means. You either don't have, or can't articulate, even a simple understanding of the various concepts at play. Which makes me wonder how you've been able to craft this brilliant argument that you're so proud of. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HenryJames

HenryJames 65889

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Kyle said:

So basically my argument is correct, and since you cannot refute it you're just going to tell me you're too busy to refute. I mean, you don't have much going for you but throwing shit at strangers online, so you're clearly at Augusta or doing anything else worthwhile. Take a shot. Show me how smart you are.

shapiro_tenrules.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gatorubet

Gatorubet 30088

Posted
Posted
57 minutes ago, Kyle said:

But please, keep making this thread about me. I'm flattered, but ad homs and straw men make me roll my eyes but not like I lose sleep over some online nutjob calling me a name.  I'm totally open to being wrong, but none of the posters so far seem to really be able to formluate a rational position, just tribal silliness. I'm just surprised it's so hard to make a counter-argument. Everyone seems so convinced I'm [insert whatever ad hom you want] yet no one seems to be able to support that assertion. That's what was IMHO genius about the move - it totally exposed the racism and hypocrisy.

 

But what about the bumble bees?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Kyle said:

The entire pro-illegal immigration position is exactly that: using human beings as political pawns. 

I am seeking to understand. If one if for illegal immigration, why not place the illegal immigrants in cities that are more supportive of illegal immigration? If I was an illegal immigrant, I would prefer to go to a place where I would not worry about being detained and receive the maximum benefits. Yet, some have problems with that. I am an trying to understand why. No one seems to know why anyone would be against it other than the tribal talking points. It just seems really odd that anyone would oppose this, but I guess that's the whole basis for being a limousine liberal - all for illegal immigration as long as I don't have to be around the brown people.

But please, keep making this thread about me. I'm flattered, but ad homs and straw men make me roll my eyes but not like I lose sleep over some online nutjob calling me a name.  I'm totally open to being wrong, but none of the posters so far seem to really be able to formluate a rational position, just tribal silliness. I'm just surprised it's so hard to make a counter-argument. Everyone seems so convinced I'm [insert whatever ad hom you want] yet no one seems to be able to support that assertion. That's what was IMHO genius about the move - it totally exposed the racism and hypocrisy.

 

I’m not a “pro illegal immigration open border leftist limousine racist liberal” (did I hit all your talking points) as you just called the entire board for not engaging in your toddler like “discussion”

Im a simple hardworking MS-13 insurance salesman with a rather sizeable investment in Chinese trumpy bear factories. 

So basically I need idiots and trolls like you to whip themselves and others into an anti-brown frenzy so I can put my kids through a real college and have them live a better life than this unfortunate graduate of trump university. 

So please. Carry on. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EMAWesome

EMAWesome 101

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, SubliminalHorn said:

The fact that human beings are being used as political pawns in a game that piece of shit in the White House is playing. But I’m sure you were already aware of that argument. 

Like the Democrats aren't also using them as pawns.  The easy answer is the Democrat politicians don't actually care about illegal immigrants.  They care about the votes of illegal immigrants.  Also a lot of them know sanctuary cities are stupid ideas that will not work.   They do not care to allow anything to happen that proves it.  

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29237

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

Like the Democrats aren't also using them as pawns.  The easy answer is the Democrat politicians don't actually care about illegal immigrants.  They care about the votes of illegal immigrants.  Also a lot of them know sanctuary cities are stupid ideas that will not work.   They do not care to allow anything to happen that proves it.  

What does “sanctuary cities are stupid ideas that will not work” even mean?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Judge Roybeanbag

Judge Roybeanbag 11809

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, EMAWesome said:

Like the Democrats aren't also using them as pawns.  The easy answer is the Democrat politicians don't actually care about illegal immigrants.  They care about the votes of illegal immigrants.  Also a lot of them know sanctuary cities are stupid ideas that will not work.   They do not care to allow anything to happen that proves it.  

And illegal immigrants vote in large numbers?   Really?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mdmost

mdmost 42860

Posted
Posted

Lolz.

Quote

Trump Wants to Bus Migrants to Sanctuary Cities. The Mayors There Are Fine With It.
The Daily Beast  By Scott.Bixby@thedailybeast.com (Scott Bixby) Sam.Brodey@thedailybeast.com (Sam Brodey),The Daily Beast Fri, Apr 12 3:46 PM CDT 
Reactions  Reblog on Tumblr  Share  Tweet  Email

JIM WATSON
President Donald Trump may have assumed that his proposal to release undocumented immigrants into so-called “sanctuary cities” would back Democrats into a corner on the issue of immigration. But the local officials in those cities he’s targeting don’t seem to actually find the prospect all that foreboding.

Instead, when asked about the plan—which would entail busing migrants apprehended at the U.S.-Mexico border to be released in cities that do not cooperate with federal law enforcement to arrest undocumented immigrants—mayors of major cities, regional capitals and medium-sized towns told The Daily Beast said that they would welcome those currently being detained.

“The city would be prepared to welcome these immigrants just as we have embraced our immigrant communities for decades,” Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney told The Daily Beast in a statement. “This White House plan demonstrates the utter contempt that the Trump administration has for basic human dignity and the core values on which this nation was founded.”

“As a welcoming city, we would welcome these migrants with open arms, just as we welcomed Syrian refugees, just as we welcomed Puerto Ricans displaced by Hurricane Maria and just as we welcome Rohingya refugees fleeing genocide in Myanmar,” said Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel in a statement.

“I am proud that Cambridge is a sanctuary city,” Mayor Marc McGovern of Cambridge, Massachusetts, told The Daily Beast. “Trump is a schoolyard bully who tries to intimidate and threaten people. I’m not intimidated and if asylum seekers find their way to Cambridge, we’ll welcome them.”

The response to Trump’s proposal is almost certainly not what the president expected and reflects the vast gulf that is growing between the two parties on immigration policy. The president’s idea was presented as a threat meant to scare Democrats into admitting that they wouldn’t be as accommodating of immigrant communities as they have pledged to be.

“We’ll give ’em to the sanctuary cities, maybe, to take care of, if that’s the way they want it,” Trump said during an event originally intended to pitch U.S. companies on the deployment of 5G technology. “We are looking at the possibility, strongly looking at it, to be honest with you.”

“We’ll give them more people,” Trump continued. “We can give them an unlimited supply—let’s see if they have open arms.”

How serious the administration is about pushing the idea remains unclear. The White House originally denied that they were seriously considering busing undocumented immigrants and migrants detained at the border to sanctuary cities, saying it was “just a suggestion that was floated and rejected, which ended any further discussion.” But the president has since leaned into it, even tweeting that he was giving it “strong consideration.”

That gambit, experts say, is both logistically and legally dubious. And multiple mayors told The Daily Beast that it only makes the Trump administration’s immigration policy look incoherent.

“Like so many issues we are forced to talk about during this presidency, this isn’t a real idea or a real proposal, it’s just another scare tactic,” said San Francisco Mayor London Breed. The city, home to the congressional district currently held by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, is specifically mentioned as a potential target of Trump’s policy. “Every time we talk about the president’s latest tweet… we aren’t talking about a path to citizenship for the over 10 million undocumented immigrants in our country.”

Some pointed out that the proposal would only exacerbate what the president has characterized as an immigration crisis.

“Humans are not pawns. This is not a game. These are people’s lives,” said Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler. “Portland will continue to protect its sanctuary status in accordance with Oregon law and the U.S. Constitution. We strongly denounce the cruel efforts of this administration to retaliate against sanctuary cities.”

Previous Trump administration threats to retaliate against sanctuary cities have not materialized into actual policy. Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions had vowed to withhold federal law enforcement grants from jurisdictions that declined to cooperate with ICE. But 29 of 30 municipalities that had received Sessions’ letters still ended up receiving those grants. Federal courts also sided with sanctuary cities after Trump issued an executive order restricting federal funding for such cities.

“It’s a sign of the president’s tremendous weakness as an executive and weakness as a leader, and of the degree to which he pales in comparison to all of his recent predecessors,” Mayor Daniel Drew of Middletown, Connecticut told The Daily Beast. “This threat is hollow and more than anything is a sign of the tremendous weakness of the Trump administration.”

In Coachella, the California desert town famous for its music festival, Mayor Steven Hernandez told The Daily Beast that the city already works with outside organizations to ensure that undocumented immigrants are able to integrate into the community. Were the administration to bus in migrants from the border, Hernandez said, the community would welcome them.

“We have already been working alongside partners to ensure that recently arrived families, women and children get the services they need to make their successful transition into America,” he said.

Democrats in Congress, meanwhile, were exasperated with the president’s latest immigration gambit, and said they stand willing to work on policy if the White House would quit with the posturing.

Rep. Ro Khanna, a California Democrat who represents part of San Jose, a sanctuary jurisdiction, called on Trump to propose “real solutions.”

“Most of the communities he believes people should be going to are ones who would believe in just processing and treating people humanely and having that process,” Khanna told The Daily Beast by phone. “Is he gonna pay for people to be flown in there? Is he going to be paying for judges? It’s just logistically infeasible.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Democrat who represents Maryland’s Montgomery County, a jurisdiction ICE has called consistently not cooperative, said that the political conditions were actually ripe for negotiations with the White House and congressional Republicans.

“It’s unfortunate that the president is in such a dark and vindictive state of mind. I don’t know where he thinks that leads,” added Raskin. “He’s a day trader. He’ll be off on another idea tomorrow.”

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
achooloco

achooloco 1065

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, EMAWesome said:

They care about the votes of illegal immigrants.  Also a lot of them know sanctuary cities are stupid ideas that will not work.   

Link to any facts that substantiate these two claims? Link to anything showing these election changing votes cast by all the illegal immigrants?

 

edit: just saw judge asked the same..

Edited by achooloco
Link to comment
Share on other sites
elfenix

elfenix 34171

Posted
Posted
Link to any facts that substantiate these two claims? Link to anything showing these election changing votes cast by all the illegal immigrants?
 
edit: just saw judge asked the same..
We know illegal immigrants are coming in droves because of all those videos on youtube of buses full of illegals pulling up to polling stations right before close.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted

The only purpose of this thread is to troll the board and gaslight it accusing the board of everything the OP is doing (like being racist and stupid) and to give the right wing trolls and socks like onboard, Zook and Chrispy troll a chance to rep their own socks stupid posts. 

Its a great thread in other words. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

The only purpose of this thread is to troll the board and gaslight it accusing the board of everything the OP is doing (like being racist and stupid) and to give the right wing trolls and socks like onboard, Zook and Chrispy troll a chance to rep their own socks stupid posts. 

Its a great thread in other words. 

Get those voices you keep hearing checked out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zork

zork 629

Posted
Posted (edited)

Is the reason for not sending the immigrants to sanctuary cities because the feds aren't allowed to release them in non-border areas?  Maybe not authorized to pay for them to travel to those cities perhaps?  If they are authorized to pay for their travel, seems like there has been many cases where it was paid, it seems like a near Canadien border city like Seattle would be the obvious choice, or the Portland area.  

Since the sanctuary cities are not willing to work with the federal government on immigration issues then it would be up to those cities to fund their new members of their city by themselves with no federal dollars as well.  

The feds might actually save money this way with the cost of the bus ride or plane ride deferred in reduction in food/healthcare/detention costs at the border.  Win/win/win: feds save money, local communities that are welcoming immigrants get more, immigrants get to be where they are wanted.

Just not in LA according to Cher:

Cher gets the red pill.

edit:

Dang, the costs per immigrant from a 2018 report linked are estimated at ~$79k per person by the Feds for the first five years:

Quote

...

Using the most recent admissions figures, data on federal and state public assistance programs, and information from the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), our analysis found:

  • The cost per refugee to American taxpayers just under $79,600 in the first five years after a refugee is resettled in the U.S.;
  • In 2016, the State Department spent nearly $545 million to process and resettle refugees, including $140,389,177 on transportation costs;
  • Of the $1.8 billion in resettlement costs, $867 billion was spent on welfare alone;
  • In their first five years, approximately 54 percent of all refugees will hold jobs that pay less than $11 an hour;
  • $71 million will be spent to educate refugees and asylum-seekers, a majority of which will be paid by state and local governments.
  • Over five years, an estimated 15.7 percent of all refugees will need housing assistance, which is roughly $7,600 per household in 2014 dollars.

It is important to note that this analysis does not address the costs associated with any incurred national security and law enforcement costs associated with some refugees who pose a threat. The total price of additional vetting and screening expenditures, law enforcement and criminal justice costs, and federal homeland security assistance to state and local agencies is hard to quantify.

...

 

http://fairus.org/issue/legal-immigration/fiscal-cost-resettling-refugees-united-states

They should pay their own way.  That is way too expensive.

Edited by zork
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bullneck

Bullneck 18987

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, EMAWesome said:

Like the Democrats aren't also using them as pawns.  The easy answer is the Democrat politicians don't actually care about illegal immigrants.  They care about the votes of illegal immigrants.  Also a lot of them know sanctuary cities are stupid ideas that will not work.   They do not care to allow anything to happen that proves it.  

Occasionally I read something like this that is unintentionally funny, but I don't know whether to laugh or cry.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bojack

Bojack 2073

Posted
Posted

Democrats want open borders because illegal immigrants are voting for them is what 40% of the country is dumb enough to think. In their world, Trump's 3 million illegal votes in California claim was never refuted.  EMA will provide no evidence, not even circumstantial, of his claim and the absence of evidence will not get him to reconsider. He posted this in the comic relief thread.

screen-shot-2019-04-06-at-3-34-03-pm-png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13546

Posted
Posted

Of course the guy who thinks circumstantial evidence isn't allowed in court proceedings also believes illegal immigrants are voting in any meaningful numbers, almost as if the GOP wasn't just busted for voter fraud in North Carolina. The 'ol 1-2 punch of accusation/confession coupled with ignorance that would fail a citizenship test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...