logo Sign In

Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 775

This topic has been locked by a moderator.

Author
Time

flametitan said:

There’s a significant problem with illegal immigration: It’s actually pretty hard to legally immigrate, if this infographic is still up to date.

Now, barring that part, The process of dealing with illegal immigration should not be built on separating children from families, and even deportation might be a little strong when it comes to what these families are trying to escape from. Likely, illegal immigrants should be given due process for y’know, being able to legally become American citizens.

Indeed, this all comes down to how we want to handle the problem (or “challenge” if that helps). The trouble is devising a system that works and is fair and stable.

Due process is a reason we detain people so long. The reasons we ultimately deport are another (and crucial) matter.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/27/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/21/theres-no-immigration-crisis-and-these-charts-prove-it/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.1e4e01522ed0

Here’s some good information that I’m sure Warbler won’t care about. But if anyone is interested in a starting point for how the illegal immigration “crisis” is blown out of proportion, here’s a couple articles.

I think it’s fair to come up with a set of parameters that, in the abstract, would define an “illegal immigration crisis”, and this could vary from person to person. Then, once you have those parameters, see if the facts match them.

For example, I’m going to rhetorically take the position of a “zero tolerance, law-and-order-at-all-costs” observer. By that criteria, the fact that undocumented immigrants have lower crime rates than the native population isn’t relevant, nor is the fact that they provide a net economic boon. So we simply disregard those facts. They crossed the border illegally, and that’s the only point that matters here.

So to constitute a crisis, merely one person needs to disregard the law and cross the border? Well, even for me, that’s a little extreme. If they get caught and sent back, that’s the law functioning as designed, not a crisis. So to be a crisis, a “zero tolerance, law-and-order-at-all-costs” observer could fairly say more people would have to be crossing the Mexican border than were being sent back.

Which means, for a “zero tolerance, law-and-order-at-all-costs” observer, there was once a crisis, but it ended about ten years ago. Other observers with other priorities such as public safety or economic concerns may find that there has been no illegal immigration crisis for a much longer period of time.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

Author
Time

Cat, I doubt your asserted stats and I don’t think there’s a “crisis” but think there is an immigration problem.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

Mrebo said:

flametitan said:

There’s a significant problem with illegal immigration: It’s actually pretty hard to legally immigrate, if this infographic is still up to date.

Now, barring that part, The process of dealing with illegal immigration should not be built on separating children from families, and even deportation might be a little strong when it comes to what these families are trying to escape from. Likely, illegal immigrants should be given due process for y’know, being able to legally become American citizens.

Indeed, this all comes down to how we want to handle the problem (or “challenge” if that helps). The trouble is devising a system that works and is fair and stable.

Due process is a reason we detain people so long. The reasons we ultimately deport are another (and crucial) matter.

Oh certainly. I do not pretend to have all the answers to life’s woes. It is a tangle and a mess, though I think most of us can agree that the system in its current form is going down a terrible path.

My ideal for due process, however, is likely one where detainment isn’t necessary (as I get the impression that the fear of detainment is a contributing factor to the lack of reporting from immigrants), so much as regular check ins with immigrants trying to acclimate to American life to make sure everything’s going well and the paperwork for due process is being done.

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler: Why is illegal immigration a problem?

Mrebo said:

Illegal immigration is a threat to our security because we don’t know who is coming in, the overall impact on our economy is arguable but there is some negative impact, illegal immigration results in a permanent second-class status for millions of people, crimes go unreported out of fear, gangs like MS13 profit from it, it is unfair to those who follow the law to become citizens, among other reasons.

Author
Time

Warbler said:

Tell me, if someone were to say to you that abortion is not a huge and controversial issue, would you waste time trying to convince the guy that he was wrong?

Ok, I am going to re-word this to make crystal clear what I meant here.

Tell me, if someone were to say to you that 1 + 1 does not equal 2, would you waste time trying to convince the guy that he was wrong?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Mrebo said:

Cat, I doubt your asserted stats and I don’t think there’s a “crisis” but think there is an immigration problem.

Well that’s something.

Here are the links:

More illegal immigrants leaving the US than entering over Mexican border (this is an article, but that stats are from Pew):
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/01/27/even-before-trump-more-mexicans-were-leaving-the-us-than-arriving/?utm_term=.56ebbbbb71de

And here: http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2017/apr/26/ron-kind/yes-experiencing-net-outflow-illegal-undocumented-/

Crime rates were already covered in mfm’s post.

Economic impact: http://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2016/1/27/the-effects-of-immigration-on-the-united-states-economy

There are definitely problems, I agree. Crimes are definitely being committed, and that needs to stop. Hate crimes are through the roof. No, there’s plenty of room for improvement.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

Author
Time

Problems with crime rate numbers is they don’t habitually account for citizenship and crimes can go unreported for fear of legal repercussions.

Economic effect involves numerous competing variables that are extremely difficult to account for. Also, a person may reasonably find fault on the basis of negative impact in one area, notwithstanding the overall impact.

No doubt we can both compile facts and links to support one argument or the other, but we can’t pretend there is a pat answer.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Mrebo said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Warbler said:

Tell me, if someone were to say to you that abortion is not a huge and controversial issue, would you waste time trying to convince the guy that he was wrong?

I’m not saying it isn’t a controversial issue. It clearly is. I’m saying that I’d like to hear some of the reasons people think having much fewer restrictions on it is a bad thing, because I’ve yet to hear an argument that convinces me we need to be cracking down the way so many seem to think we do.

Note that everything I just said applies equally to my views on abortion, since you brought that up.

Basically, it’s a controversial issue because people think it’s a problem. I’m not convinced it’s a problem at all, and anytime someone here has been asked why they think it is, the answer seems to be “it just is” with no reasoning given.

I haven’t seen those questions/exchanges.

As I said, I start from the premise that immigration law is good and necessary. Illegal immigration is a threat to our security because we don’t know who is coming in, the overall impact on our economy is arguable but there is some negative impact, illegal immigration results in a permanent second-class status for millions of people, crimes go unreported out of fear, gangs like MS13 profit from it, it is unfair to those who follow the law to become citizens, among other reasons.

then change the fucking law. as shown in the infographic above shared by flametitan, it’s a pain in the ass to even be eligible to apply for US citizenship. do you think families trying to run for their lives give a shit or have the resources to try to do that? or have any of the necessary qualifications? no they don’t. so because they have no previous ties to the US, they deserve to suffer? the system is not fair at all.

honestly just change the system, and stop being so close minded. this is xenophobia at its best. like already stated in the thread, the whole concept of borders is absolute bullshit - especially given to the US (given its history). not to mention that to prevent someone from having a better shot at life or trying to pursue happiness simply because they were born in another place goes directly against the declaration of independence, word for word.

perhaps if there was a law change and a better structure to deal with immigrants that can’t go through all the bureaucracy that’s now in place (just something to help them settle or something like that) then illegal immigration would be no problem at all because it then would be legal immigration and the immigrants would (if the policy/idea i’m proposing here worked) be helping society and the economy prosper.

 

the US is the richest and most prosperous country in the world, or at least in the west, and that comes with consequences. you may choose to act nobly and basically try to help those in need (but NOT like the military theoretically did in the middle east) or you can choose to close the door to anyone in need and to try to prosper alone, gates and borders closed.

Author
Time

Collipso said:

Mrebo said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Warbler said:

Tell me, if someone were to say to you that abortion is not a huge and controversial issue, would you waste time trying to convince the guy that he was wrong?

I’m not saying it isn’t a controversial issue. It clearly is. I’m saying that I’d like to hear some of the reasons people think having much fewer restrictions on it is a bad thing, because I’ve yet to hear an argument that convinces me we need to be cracking down the way so many seem to think we do.

Note that everything I just said applies equally to my views on abortion, since you brought that up.

Basically, it’s a controversial issue because people think it’s a problem. I’m not convinced it’s a problem at all, and anytime someone here has been asked why they think it is, the answer seems to be “it just is” with no reasoning given.

I haven’t seen those questions/exchanges.

As I said, I start from the premise that immigration law is good and necessary. Illegal immigration is a threat to our security because we don’t know who is coming in, the overall impact on our economy is arguable but there is some negative impact, illegal immigration results in a permanent second-class status for millions of people, crimes go unreported out of fear, gangs like MS13 profit from it, it is unfair to those who follow the law to become citizens, among other reasons.

then change the fucking law. as shown in the infographic above shared by flametitan, it’s a pain in the ass to even be eligible to apply for US citizenship. do you think families trying to run for their lives give a shit or have the resources to try to do that? or have any of the necessary qualifications? no they don’t. so because they have no previous ties to the US, they deserve to suffer? the system is not fair at all.

honestly just change the system, and stop being so close minded. this is xenophobia at its best. like already stated in the thread, the whole concept of borders is absolute bullshit - especially given to the US (given its history). not to mention that to prevent someone from having a better shot at life or trying to pursue happiness simply because they were born in another place goes directly against the declaration of independence, word for word.

perhaps if there was a law change and a better structure to deal with immigrants that can’t go through all the bureaucracy that’s now in place (just something to help them settle or something like that) then illegal immigration would be no problem at all because it then would be legal immigration and the immigrants would (if the policy/idea i’m proposing here worked) be helping society and the economy prosper.

 

the US is the richest and most prosperous country in the world, or at least in the west, and that comes with consequences. you may choose to act nobly and basically try to help those in need (but NOT like the military theoretically did in the middle east) or you can choose to close the door to anyone in need and to try to prosper alone, gates and borders closed.

The one thing I agree with you on is: change the law.

The open borders stuff is nonsense but I think a sensible solution could be found to provide for increased immigration.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

Mrebo said:

Collipso said:

Mrebo said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Warbler said:

Tell me, if someone were to say to you that abortion is not a huge and controversial issue, would you waste time trying to convince the guy that he was wrong?

I’m not saying it isn’t a controversial issue. It clearly is. I’m saying that I’d like to hear some of the reasons people think having much fewer restrictions on it is a bad thing, because I’ve yet to hear an argument that convinces me we need to be cracking down the way so many seem to think we do.

Note that everything I just said applies equally to my views on abortion, since you brought that up.

Basically, it’s a controversial issue because people think it’s a problem. I’m not convinced it’s a problem at all, and anytime someone here has been asked why they think it is, the answer seems to be “it just is” with no reasoning given.

I haven’t seen those questions/exchanges.

As I said, I start from the premise that immigration law is good and necessary. Illegal immigration is a threat to our security because we don’t know who is coming in, the overall impact on our economy is arguable but there is some negative impact, illegal immigration results in a permanent second-class status for millions of people, crimes go unreported out of fear, gangs like MS13 profit from it, it is unfair to those who follow the law to become citizens, among other reasons.

then change the fucking law. as shown in the infographic above shared by flametitan, it’s a pain in the ass to even be eligible to apply for US citizenship. do you think families trying to run for their lives give a shit or have the resources to try to do that? or have any of the necessary qualifications? no they don’t. so because they have no previous ties to the US, they deserve to suffer? the system is not fair at all.

honestly just change the system, and stop being so close minded. this is xenophobia at its best. like already stated in the thread, the whole concept of borders is absolute bullshit - especially given to the US (given its history). not to mention that to prevent someone from having a better shot at life or trying to pursue happiness simply because they were born in another place goes directly against the declaration of independence, word for word.

perhaps if there was a law change and a better structure to deal with immigrants that can’t go through all the bureaucracy that’s now in place (just something to help them settle or something like that) then illegal immigration would be no problem at all because it then would be legal immigration and the immigrants would (if the policy/idea i’m proposing here worked) be helping society and the economy prosper.

 

the US is the richest and most prosperous country in the world, or at least in the west, and that comes with consequences. you may choose to act nobly and basically try to help those in need (but NOT like the military theoretically did in the middle east) or you can choose to close the door to anyone in need and to try to prosper alone, gates and borders closed.

The one thing I agree with you on is: change the law.

The open borders stuff is nonsense but I think a sensible solution could be found to provide for increased immigration.

that’s good enough

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

You can use that term. It’s how it’s been being used that is causing the objection I think.

What term would you like me to use when criticizing liberals?

Forum Administrator

MTFBWY…A

Author
Time

Jay said:

TV’s Frink said:

You can use that term. It’s how it’s been being used that is causing the objection I think.

What term would you like me to use when criticizing liberals?

not sure if you don’t understand the fact that no one cares that you use the term liberals, or? (Frink literally said “it’s how it is being used that is causing the objection I think”.

It might have something to do with the fact that you make large denigrating comments about “modern liberals” that makes some suspect that you are using it as a pejorative.

Author
Time

See Jay, just stop criticizing liberals and you’ll be okay 😉

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

Coming up with an appropriate, fair, and managable immigration policy is a very difficult problem. That doesn’t mean there is a “crisis”. Every statistic shows clearly that there is no crisis. However, the Republican party and Fox News have done an incredibly effective job of convincing a large swath of the American people that there is one. Blaming a country’s problems on “others” is a historically proven way of easily whipping up frenzied support.

I wish that the two parties could discuss the policy details like adults instead of screaming at each other. Both sides are painting the other as so extreme… Republicans claiming that democrats want a Muslim invasion and want to destroy America… Democrats claiming that republicans are shipping refugees to concentration camps. Coming up with a reasonable policy is too difficult to possibly be achieved in a toxic political environment like this.

The only crisis is the insane rhetoric.

"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Warbler said:

Warbler said:

Tell me, if someone were to say to you that abortion is not a huge and controversial issue, would you waste time trying to convince the guy that he was wrong?

Ok, I am going to re-word this to make crystal clear what I meant here.

Tell me, if someone were to say to you that 1 + 1 does not equal 2, would you waste time trying to convince the guy that he was wrong?

That’s a horrible example. It’s probably the worst and most inaccurate analogy you could possibly have chosen. The right claims that illegal immigration is a huge threat to the nation. I, and others, have said that that threat is largely manufactured and isn’t a huge “problem” as in it isn’t a huge danger to this country. You, for some reason, refuse to drop this idea that we’re somehow saying that illegal immigration isn’t controversial, which no one said. Then you don’t even articulate why you think it’s so irrational for us not to find illegal immigration to be a horrifying threat to the American way of life. Yeah, that situation is nothing like someone claiming that 1 + 1 doesn’t equal 2.

Mrebo said:

See Jay, just stop criticizing liberals and you’ll be okay 😉

Oh my God. Can you two people really not figure out that it’s ridiculous and unreasonable to just lump all liberals in with the stupid people of the left? I’m sure Jay would have a big problem, and probably attribute the behavior to ‘modern liberals’, if I said, “The problem with modern conservatives is that they keep having Nazi rallies and running people over that try to counter-protest them.” Something tells me that Jay wouldn’t think that this was intelligent commentary.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

Alright. Immigration’s got a couple of problems? And a couple of pluses.

I see the illegal immigrants as the go-getters in a way. I mean these are the guys with the will and drive to make life better for themselves and their families. They’re not happy to get stuck in a rut. They’re the risk takers. They’re the kind of spirit that drove America to greatness in the past because we weren’t afraid to go to a new land an try something daring and hard.

So I think these guys should be given some tests to prove they’d be a good match for the rest of us? And then welcomed home with open arms.

Fast-track citizenship if you sign up for a 2 year tour in the army for example? Or if you can pass some other obvious loyalty test. I mean I don’t have all the answers. But something meaningful would help for sure.

The trouble with wide open doors tho is that it lowers the bar for how hard it is to get in. That means we stop just getting the hard workers and instead start getting waves of leeches. Guys who just figure it’s an easy win. So we have to have a hard, but fair way in.

Next problem is a lot of the time people leave their old country because the politics there are so much worse than possible. I mean even worse than we’ve got. But the trouble is people leaving don’t always realize they bring their politics with them. Sometimes it’s a good thing? As in a want to never repeat the same mistakes? But other times it can be a problem if they subconsciously want to recreate the very same problem they left behind. Because it’s what they know. Because it’s what seems normal for them. Because it’s what everyone in their “group” is voting into. Because somehow it’s comfortable in a way.

Maybe one fix for the fast-track system would be to only let immigrants vote after a period of time on their feet in America? I mean that would keep the temptation low to pander their way? And would keep us from getting a sudden wave of change in stable neighborhoods. I mean not all change is bad of course. But it’s harder when someone who hasn’t grown up in an area comes in in a group and changes things than it is if it’s done by groups who first take the time to mix in with local ways first and then suggest change later.

Or something.

K. Let’s have this ride.

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

dahmage said:

Trump has certain goals, they haven’t really changed since his campaign.

  1. keep out foreigners
  2. tear down any climate regulation (jobs!)
  3. renegotiate any trade agreements (jobs!)
  4. tear apart the Iran nuclear deal
  5. tear apart obamacare

his tactic is being unpredictable.

None of these are his goals. They are (in his mind) ends to a means => winning.

I think Trump has a list in his draw with everything Obama did and he’s going through that ticking it off one by one when it’s been dismantled, reversed, or cancelled. There is no ideology behind his goals, just spite because Obama mocked him one time at that press dinner.

VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

Warbler said:

Warbler said:

Tell me, if someone were to say to you that abortion is not a huge and controversial issue, would you waste time trying to convince the guy that he was wrong?

Ok, I am going to re-word this to make crystal clear what I meant here.

Tell me, if someone were to say to you that 1 + 1 does not equal 2, would you waste time trying to convince the guy that he was wrong?

That’s a horrible example. It’s probably the worst and most inaccurate analogy you could possibly have chosen. The right claims that illegal immigration is a huge threat to the nation. I, and others, have said that that threat is largely manufactured and isn’t a huge “problem” as in it isn’t a huge danger to this country. You, for some reason, refuse to drop this idea that we’re somehow saying that illegal immigration isn’t controversial, which no one said. Then you don’t even articulate why you think it’s so irrational for us not to find illegal immigration to be a horrifying threat to the American way of life. Yeah, that situation is nothing like someone claiming that 1 + 1 doesn’t equal 2.

Mrebo said:

See Jay, just stop criticizing liberals and you’ll be okay 😉

Oh my God. Can you two people really not figure out that it’s ridiculous and unreasonable to just lump all liberals in with the stupid people of the left? I’m sure Jay would have a big problem, and probably attribute the behavior to ‘modern liberals’, if I said, “The problem with modern conservatives is that they keep having Nazi rallies and running people over that try to counter-protest them.” Something tells me that Jay wouldn’t think that this was intelligent commentary.

Your “oh my God” made me laugh. What Jay said was he has come to expect an inability to weigh nuance from modern liberals. If you think that’s unfair, fine. But the complaint instead was that he said something bad about liberals (that he was using “liberal” as an epithet). Imagine instead of your Nazi analogy, you said what Jay said, but about “modern conservatives” (talk about an oxymoron, amirite?).

If I complained that you were using “conservative” as an epithet by saying you expect an inability to weigh nuance…I think that clearly misses the point.

Sure, that kind of statement, no matter how true, can derail discussion. But Jay is clearly speaking as a frustrated liberal himself.

If I complained, as I have previously in this thread, about conservatives I don’t think that crosses any line either.

The real objection is that Jay sees many problems in modern liberalism that hurts causes he cares about.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

Warbler said:

Warbler said:

Tell me, if someone were to say to you that abortion is not a huge and controversial issue, would you waste time trying to convince the guy that he was wrong?

Ok, I am going to re-word this to make crystal clear what I meant here.

Tell me, if someone were to say to you that 1 + 1 does not equal 2, would you waste time trying to convince the guy that he was wrong?

I don’t even know how to respond to this. 1+1=2 is an empirical fact. “Immigration is a problem” and “abortion is a problem” are not empirical facts, they’re opinions.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Mrebo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Warbler said:

Warbler said:

Tell me, if someone were to say to you that abortion is not a huge and controversial issue, would you waste time trying to convince the guy that he was wrong?

Ok, I am going to re-word this to make crystal clear what I meant here.

Tell me, if someone were to say to you that 1 + 1 does not equal 2, would you waste time trying to convince the guy that he was wrong?

That’s a horrible example. It’s probably the worst and most inaccurate analogy you could possibly have chosen. The right claims that illegal immigration is a huge threat to the nation. I, and others, have said that that threat is largely manufactured and isn’t a huge “problem” as in it isn’t a huge danger to this country. You, for some reason, refuse to drop this idea that we’re somehow saying that illegal immigration isn’t controversial, which no one said. Then you don’t even articulate why you think it’s so irrational for us not to find illegal immigration to be a horrifying threat to the American way of life. Yeah, that situation is nothing like someone claiming that 1 + 1 doesn’t equal 2.

Mrebo said:

See Jay, just stop criticizing liberals and you’ll be okay 😉

Oh my God. Can you two people really not figure out that it’s ridiculous and unreasonable to just lump all liberals in with the stupid people of the left? I’m sure Jay would have a big problem, and probably attribute the behavior to ‘modern liberals’, if I said, “The problem with modern conservatives is that they keep having Nazi rallies and running people over that try to counter-protest them.” Something tells me that Jay wouldn’t think that this was intelligent commentary.

Your “oh my God” made me laugh. What Jay said was he has come to expect an inability to weigh nuance from modern liberals. If you think that’s unfair, fine. But the complaint instead was that he said something bad about liberals (that he was using “liberal” as an epithet). Imagine instead of your Nazi analogy, you said what Jay said, but about “modern conservatives” (talk about an oxymoron, amirite?).

If I complained that you were using “conservative” as an epithet by saying you expect an inability to weigh nuance…I think that clearly misses the point.

What? That’s not all he’s blamed on “the left” and “Democrats”. He’s attributing purity tests, language policing, mass hypocrisy, etc. etc. on “the left”. The wording changes sometimes, but it’s usually “the left,” “modern liberals,” “liberals,” and language like that. Perhaps a less extreme example from me would be, “The problem with modern conservatives is that they refuse to disavow neo-Nazis,” or “The problem with modern conservatives is that they disregard the Constitution,” or “The problem with modern conservatives is that they condone police murder,” or “The problem with modern conservatives is that they vote for idiotic reality TV stars,” or “The problem with modern conservatives is that they condone voter suppression.” It’s dishonest and unfair. The reason I gave you an “oh my God,” is because you can’t, or refuse to, wrap your mind around the fact that no one (literally no one in this thread) has said that you can’t criticize liberals.

Sure, that kind of statement, no matter how true, can derail discussion. But Jay is clearly speaking as a frustrated liberal himself.

No he isn’t. He’s clearly parroting Dave Rubin/Steven Crowder talking points.

If I complained, as I have previously in this thread, about conservatives I don’t think that crosses any line either.

Not the point. No one cares what he complains about.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

Mrebo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Warbler said:

Warbler said:

Tell me, if someone were to say to you that abortion is not a huge and controversial issue, would you waste time trying to convince the guy that he was wrong?

Ok, I am going to re-word this to make crystal clear what I meant here.

Tell me, if someone were to say to you that 1 + 1 does not equal 2, would you waste time trying to convince the guy that he was wrong?

That’s a horrible example. It’s probably the worst and most inaccurate analogy you could possibly have chosen. The right claims that illegal immigration is a huge threat to the nation. I, and others, have said that that threat is largely manufactured and isn’t a huge “problem” as in it isn’t a huge danger to this country. You, for some reason, refuse to drop this idea that we’re somehow saying that illegal immigration isn’t controversial, which no one said. Then you don’t even articulate why you think it’s so irrational for us not to find illegal immigration to be a horrifying threat to the American way of life. Yeah, that situation is nothing like someone claiming that 1 + 1 doesn’t equal 2.

Mrebo said:

See Jay, just stop criticizing liberals and you’ll be okay 😉

Oh my God. Can you two people really not figure out that it’s ridiculous and unreasonable to just lump all liberals in with the stupid people of the left? I’m sure Jay would have a big problem, and probably attribute the behavior to ‘modern liberals’, if I said, “The problem with modern conservatives is that they keep having Nazi rallies and running people over that try to counter-protest them.” Something tells me that Jay wouldn’t think that this was intelligent commentary.

Your “oh my God” made me laugh. What Jay said was he has come to expect an inability to weigh nuance from modern liberals. If you think that’s unfair, fine. But the complaint instead was that he said something bad about liberals (that he was using “liberal” as an epithet). Imagine instead of your Nazi analogy, you said what Jay said, but about “modern conservatives” (talk about an oxymoron, amirite?).

If I complained that you were using “conservative” as an epithet by saying you expect an inability to weigh nuance…I think that clearly misses the point.

What? That’s not all he’s blamed on “the left” and “Democrats”. He’s attributing purity tests, language policing, mass hypocrisy, etc. etc. on “the left”. The wording changes sometimes, but it’s usually “the left,” “modern liberals,” “liberals,” and language like that. Perhaps a less extreme example from me would be, “The problem with modern conservatives is that they refuse to disavow neo-Nazis,” or “The problem with modern conservatives is that they disregard the Constitution,” or “The problem with modern conservatives is that they condone police murder,” or “The problem with modern conservatives is that they vote for idiotic reality TV stars,” or “The problem with modern conservatives is that they condone voter suppression.” It’s dishonest and unfair.

I wonder if the other liberal members in this thread who take issue with Jay’s comments also think your hypothetical criticisms of conservatives are dishonest and unfair.

The reason I gave you an “oh my God,” is because you can’t, or refuse to, wrap your mind around the fact that no one (literally no one in this thread) has said that you can’t criticize liberals.

Go back and note my emote.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

Mrebo said:

I wonder if the other liberal members in this thread who take issue with Jay’s comments also think your hypothetical criticisms of conservatives are dishonest and unfair.

I would assume so. I don’t know. It doesn’t really matter to me what they think.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

Mrebo said:

I wonder if the other liberal members in this thread who take issue with Jay’s comments also think your hypothetical criticisms of conservatives are dishonest and unfair.

I would assume so. I don’t know. It doesn’t really matter to me what they think.

Well it matters to the extent that others are expressing similar complaints about Jay’s comments that you say nobody cares about anyway (though you don’t care what those other people think). I don’t expect you to answer for others, of course.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

This thread is the best.