How likely is it that the separation of children from families will ruin non leftism in America?

[BudKing8806]

I, for one, am happy they separate these families. Don't bring your fucking children while participating in illegal activities.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

It mitigates reactions to news. I've seen it.

It's nothing about Trump; it's an age old principle. When a fellow like yourself gets angry that trump has his photo taken with sports stars, which is unreasonable, it makes it somewhat less likely that a neutral bystander will seriously consider your outrage with Trump over a more reasonable issue

I don't recall being angry about that dope taking pictures with anyone.
That's just an example of how people like yourself operate.

Do you like it as much as I do? No?
Then don't do it to me, please.

 

[PainIsLIfe]

Including treating ALL asylum seekers as if they'd committed a felony while they wait for their asylum request to be processed then denied.

I don't know if they're denying all of them. I did hear Megan Kelly this morning say that people going to the regular border crossing points aren't being charged that way - I have no way to know if that's factual.

I do empathize with those fleeing gang violence and poverty though.

 

[Renard]

The media has latched onto this children issue because it presses emotional buttons.

Billions of people live in extreme poverty all around the world. Most people in South and Central America aren't even poor enough to qualify as being in extreme poverty, by the way. The US can't and shouldn't take people in just because they're poor, by that metric most of the world population qualifies. Migrants ARE breaking the law by entering, they KNOW they can be caught, they know they can be jailed, and their children are certainly not following them in the jail. It's that simple. You can try to manipulate the issue with emotional arguments all day long, it changes nothing to the issue.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

I don't recall being angry about that dope taking pictures with anyone.
That's just an example of how people like yourself operate.

Do you like it as much as I do? No?
Then don't do it to me, please.

1. Lol at "how people like me operate". There was a thread about the Caps visiting the White House and you made it out as if Trump would be an an attention whore for doing such. I used that example because it is small and silly. But it is certainly unreasonable to a neutral viewer, if only in a small and silly way, to single out Trump for a decades old sports/politics tradition.

My point about outrage is not that you are constantly angry. I don't find that to be the case. We disagree often enough, but I find you consistently reasonable in your views. But there certainly is a consistent anti-Trump outrage machine and yes, I do think it helps him when he does actual outrageous things, because I believe many observers have tuned in out because it is so often baseless.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

I, for one, am happy they separate these families. Don't bring your fucking children while participating in illegal activities.

When a Dem was president, this was the editorial stance of the NY Times iirc.

Thomas Friedman: https://www.nytimes.com/2000/04/25/opinion/foreign-affairs-reno-for-president.html

"Yup, I gotta confess, that now-famous picture of a U.S. marshal in Miami pointing an automatic weapon toward Donato Dalrymple and ordering him in the name of the U.S. government to turn over Elian Gonzalez warmed my heart. They should put that picture up in every visa line in every U.S. consulate around the world, with a caption that reads: ''America is a country where the rule of law rules. This picture illustrates what happens to those who defy the rule of law and how far our government and people will go to preserve it. Come all ye who understand that.''

 

[HomerThompson]

I, for one, am happy they separate these families. Don't bring your fucking children while participating in illegal activities.

 

[Jack V Savage]

It's rather rare to see someone as openly admit they were wrong and apologize for that mistake as that fellow has. He owned it. A little magnanimity would do nicely on your end. You are being a bit of an ass about it.

It's good that he admitted his mistake, but it still rings hollow. I think the issue is that the actual quote is rather obvious satire (by Dave Barry), but he took it to be an actual belief. So his mistake wasn't mainly the misquotation; it was thinking that the quotation could possibly be genuine. I would hope that WTF could learn not just that he made a very specific mistake, but that he generally holds a cartoonish view of his political opposition.

The whole episode reminds me of why reading good fiction is essential to really understanding politics.

 

[Madmick]

It's not the first time I've seen that claim made on social media, and that's not a coincidence.
If you actually read the email, there's no way you'd make that mistake.
The email to Podesta is some sort of anti-immigration rant/chain mail which doesn't acknowledge that it's quoting satire out of context.

My patience with these "mistakes" being made over and over with claims about the Podesta emails or other Clinton CTs (even after they're illuminated and challenged) is too frequent to overlook.

Viva drives me crazy with his Seymour Hersh CTs, but at least I know that he's reproducing Hersh's work with earnest fidelity. This has not been the nature of the Podesta trolls.

 

[Jack V Savage]

When a Dem was president, this was the editorial stance of the NY Times iirc.

Thomas Friedman:

When you refer to the editorial stance of a newspaper, it doesn't mean the stance of an individual columnist. It's the ones credited to the editorial board or uncredited.

 

[ShadowRun]

Why aren’t we worrying about US citizens first? You know how many people a day go to jail and are separated from their families, this is outrageous.

 

[kpt018]

I, for one, am happy they separate these families. Don't bring your fucking children while participating in illegal activities.

What did the kids do to deserve horrible treatment though?

Why aren’t we worrying about US citizens first? You know how many people a day go to jail and are separated from their families, this is outrageous.

Why do you assume no one cares about the kids of incarcerated parents?

 

[uppercutbus]

How is it any different than imprisoning any other father/mother that breaks a law here in America and we of course don't send the kids to jail along with them?

Exactly, have libs got a reply to this? I can't think of any.

 

[JonesBones]

Needs its own thread. He got a bunch of the SPLC's money. It is better used in a furnace than in the SPLC. I am glad he got it. I hope this opens up more lawsuits and drives them into the ground and into the bowels of the Earth.

In response to the settlement, Nawaz thanked supporters who helped raise funds for the legal battle and claimed a victory against the “Regressive Left,” a term he’s coined to describe far-leftists.

“With the help of everyone who contributed to our litigation fund, we were able to fight back against the Regressive Left and show them that moderate Muslims will not be silenced,” . “We will continue to combat extremists by defying Muslim stereotypes, calling out fundamentalism in our own communities, and speaking out against anti-Muslim hate.”

http://www.newsweek.com/splc-nawaz-million-apologizes-981879

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) apologized and agreed Monday to a settlement of $3.375 million to Maajid Nawaz’s Quilliam Foundation after admitting to falsely labeling his advocacy organization as “extremist.”

Nawaz, a former British politician who has railed against Islamic extremism and the false use of the Koran to incite violence around the globe, and Quilliam were incorrectly characterized and listed in the SPLC’s “A Journalist’s Manual: Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists.”

 

[abiG]

Fuck the SPLC. I hope this opens the flood gates on these assholes.

 

[The ScorpioN]

Labeling a Muslim as Islamophobic for having a different interpretation of Islam, while defending Islam via diversity of interpretations within Islam.



Can't make this shit up.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

When you refer to the editorial stance of a newspaper, it doesn't mean the stance of an individual columnist. It's the ones credited to the editorial board or uncredited.

Yes. The NY Times editorial stance was along the lines of Friedman's quote, ie it is most reoanbale to follow the law rather than be swayed by emotion. Friedman is just very quotable.

 

[44nutman]

 

[Bloodworth]

Sad state the world is in.

Keep them right where they are.

They have failed as a civilization and now want to bring those failed ideas to the countries that host them

 

[Cojopi Extomino]

I'll do what I usually do with proclamations of victory on the internet: chuckle at a stupid opinion and move on.