Trump

[Deepwater6]

Yes, he gave Congress an out, and if he knows citizenship is coming from Congress why would he bring all this negative attention to himself and the issue? To please the right side hardliners so they can say later that Trump tried to send them back but Congress wouldn't let him? 

 

 

 

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-41167896/daca-dreamers-harvey-hero-now-faces-deportation

[Buffy]

From what I gather, by not reading all the hysterical anti-Trump hate speech, is ending DACA will force Congress to act to pass a Law, ending the legal limbo for the people who are currently in the program, most likely resulting in them getting their green cards and probably a fast track to US citizenship.

 

Seriously, what is not to like about that?

Well of course you're right about it being hype. Heck by late afternoon, Trump was so rattled by the reaction that he put out a tweet saying basically, "don't worry Dreamers, if Congress doesn't meet my totally arbitrary and capricious deadline, I'll probably extend it again."

 

His technique for politics by holding a gun to the country's head is just so innovative and brilliant! Look how well his "if Congress doesn't pass a healthcare bill I'll kill the insurance companies profits by stopping CSR payments!" worked!

 

There's nothing intrinsically wrong with extortion politics, except that it so rarely works. And milder, bi-partisan versions of it are popular in America. It's exactly how we got the Budget Sequester. Obama seriously didn't think that the Republicans would stick to their refusal to pass any budget that met with his approval if the consequence was across-the-board cuts to everything, including things that would enrage their base. They happily pulled the trigger on themselves.

 

Now the difference here of course is that the Sequester's across-the-board-cuts affected everyone equally, so ultimately Republican voters said "okay we'll give up our Pentagon spending and Ethanol welfare payments as long as it means we get to stick it to Obama, and the liberals lose their evil science funding!" The problem with DACA though is that it targets a group of people chosen to rile up the anti-immigrant Trump-base at the expense of significant majorities of both parties who know that this is probably the one group of immigrants you want to keep. As evidence of this, Breitbart this morning ran their article on the announcement with a picture of MS13 gang members that was taken in El Salvador to illustrate their propaganda that DACA recipients are all coming to steal and kill (if you read the article, virtually none of it passes fact checks, but that's what the fanboys want to read):

 

Of course this is disturbing even to many of the people who voted for Trump, so to answer the question, "what's not to like?" it's basically because this kind of politics is toxic, it often backfires, it's quite un-Christian, and as the CEOs--liberal and conservative--are screaming, it's really, really bad for business.

 

Side note, even Breitbart found this use of the picture so embarrassing that they took it down and replaced it with generic clip art of someone with brown skin getting handcuffed, so even the most race-baiting press outlets have realized they've gone beyond the pale, so to speak.

 

Ultimately yes, Trump is such a wimp that he'll extend it, but that's not saying much good for him.

 

 

Go after a man's weakness, and never, ever, threaten unless you're going to follow through, because if you don't, the next time you won't be taken seriously, :phones:

Buffy

[Maine farmer]

Can you say exactly what they are throwing away?

 

Does anyone honestly believe all the hysterical hype about mass deportations?

 

From what I gather, by not reading all the hysterical anti-Trump hate speech, is ending DACA will force Congress to act to pass a Law, 

 

Force Congress?  Do you mean in the same way he has been forcing Congress on healthcare?  We may not see the mass deportations, but Trump is fueling the fires of hatred towards the people we should most be trying to keep.  And some of the racism Trump loves to court is very dangerous.

[OceanBreeze]

Force Congress?  Do you mean in the same way he has been forcing Congress on healthcare?  We may not see the mass deportations, but Trump is fueling the fires of hatred towards the people we should most be trying to keep.  And some of the racism Trump loves to court is very dangerous.

 

 

You probably do not know just how ironic your statement is. The reason Obama gave for implementing DACA, in the first place, was because he was frustrated with Congressional inaction. So, he decided to go around Congress and rewrite immigration law himself, knowing well that what he was doing was illegal under the Constitution.

 

President Trump has every right to end the illegal program and bounce the problem back to Congress, where it belongs. Let the elected representatives of the people stake their chances of being re-elected on the stance they take on this issue. That is the way the system is supposed to work.

 

And I am sure you are smart enough to know there will be no mass deportations; that sort of scare tactic is for the idiotic fear mongers.

 

I am surprised at your use of the over-worked and tiresome charge of “racism” How is it racist to uphold the laws pertaining to illegal immigration? Are you saying the laws themselves are racist? That the laws discriminate on the basis of race?

You either enter the country legally or you enter it illegally; race has not one damn thing to do with it.

 

In fact, it just so happens that the US citizens who are losing jobs to the so-called “dreamers” are far more likely to be African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans than whites. Playing the race card just does not work in this case.

[Maine farmer]

You pr

 

I am surprised at your use of the over-worked and tiresome charge of “racism” How is it racist to uphold the laws pertaining to illegal immigration? Are you saying the laws themselves are racist? That the laws discriminate on the basis of race?

You either enter the country legally or you enter it illegally; race has not one damn thing to do with it.

 

In fact, it just so happens that the US citizens who are losing jobs to the so-called “dreamers” are far more likely to be African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans than whites. Playing the race card just does not work in this case.

Everywhere I go in my area there are "Now Hiring" or "Help Wanted" signs.  Every other business I deal with is short staffed.  Jobs offering even signing bonuses and what I consider to be high pay are going unfilled.  At the end of the street where the farm is, there is subsidized housing filled with mostly white people, many of whom I witness just hanging around smoking cigarettes and drinking the coffee they buy from the local convenience store.  Most of those layabouts are white males. 

 

The laws are not themselves racist, Trump's depiction of the immigrants  is.

[OceanBreeze]

  At the end of the street where the farm is, there is subsidized housing filled with mostly white people, many of whom I witness just hanging around smoking cigarettes and drinking the coffee they buy from the local convenience store.  Most of those layabouts are white males. 

 

 

 

Careful, somebody might call those comments "racist".

 

The laws are not themselves racist, Trump's depiction of the immigrants  is.

 

 

Can you provide an example of Trump's "depiction of the immigrants" being racist, especially as it applies to his revoking the illegal program known as DACA.

[Maine farmer]

Careful, somebody might call those comments "racist".

 

 

Can you provide an example of Trump's "depiction of the immigrants" being racist, especially as it applies to his revoking the illegal program known as DACA.

Okay, most of the Trump quotes about  illegals being rapists and such were from before he ended DACA, and I will have to look for those exact quotes.

 

Since the Trump campaign gained traction, I have noticed a rise in overt racism.  I have been hearing racist comments from people I know and I thought knew better.  Previously, I had thought racism hardly existed in the people I knew.

 

As for my comments about the white male layabouts I see, well, it is just to illustrate that they are no better than other skin colors.

[Buffy]

You probably do not know just how ironic your statement is. The reason Obama gave for implementing DACA, in the first place, was because he was frustrated with Congressional inaction. So, he decided to go around Congress and rewrite immigration law himself, knowing well that what he was doing was illegal under the Constitution.

 

President Trump has every right to end the illegal program and bounce the problem back to Congress, where it belongs. Let the elected representatives of the people stake their chances of being re-elected on the stance they take on this issue. That is the way the system is supposed to work.

I can't tell you how amusing it is to see conservatives argue against the Unitary Executive theory. Oh you're in good company: Jeff Sessions' non-press conference yesterday did a great job of dismantling the entire argument that Dick Cheney and the neo-cons spent *decades* building up. Poof. And with a Republican in the White House no less.

 

Quite remarkable actually.

 

We're all laughing at your, oh what word is it that you're using, "idiotic?" Yes, idiocy.

 

And I am sure you are smart enough to know there will be no mass deportations; that sort of scare tactic is for the idiotic fear mongers.

So you're doubling down on the argument I made fun of above: no need to worry because Trump is just going to wimp-out in the end and do more of what he did yesterday, when he caved to the first proposal on the debt ceiling and Harvey relief that "Nancy and Chuck" (he's on a first name basis with them now!) threw out. Folded like a cheap suit.

 

Master negotiator!

 

But you're right. Trump is so rattled by the DACA dustup that he's running in the opposite direction as fast as he can, because he's got the conservatives pissed that he's making them *look* racist and the CEOs freaking out about their Dreamer staff:

 

For all of those (DACA) that are concerned about your status during the 6 month period, you have nothing to worry about - No action!

 

Source: @realDonaldTrump tweet 9/7/17

 

So no, no racist stuff *since* DACA anouncement, but anyone who thinks that's important is looking desperately for excuses of any kind to get out from under years now of basically catering quite explicitly to racists. I still don't think that Trump himself is racist, unlike his father, but he sure knows how to get applause from racists.

 

I am surprised at your use of the over-worked and tiresome charge of “racism” How is it racist to uphold the laws pertaining to illegal immigration? Are you saying the laws themselves are racist? That the laws discriminate on the basis of race?

 

You either enter the country legally or you enter it illegally; race has not one damn thing to do with it.

Now I know that you feel that such matters need to be analyzed solely in the abstract and that it is totally illegitimate to discuss outcomes of laws and government actions, but no you can't insist that all laws since the 1964 are by definition not racist in outcome, let alone intent.

 

You know how far back I have to go to find legal decisions finding that actual racial restriction/intent invalidated duly passed laws? Why 2017! Just look at the Texas Voter ID Law:

 

Texas’ new voter ID law was struck down Wednesday by a federal judge who said it perpetuated voting rules designed to disenfranchise minorities.

 

U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos permanently enjoined Senate Bill 5, finding that it ameliorates but does not do away with provisions that made its predecessor, Senate Bill 14, the most restrictive voter ID law in the United States.

 

Source: "Federal Judge Strikes Texas Voter ID Law as Racially Discriminatory", Cameron Langford, Courthouse News 8/24/17

 

Or North Carolina's redistricting plan:

 

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that North Carolina’s Republican-controlled legislature relied on racial gerrymandering when drawing the state’s congressional districts, a decision that could make it easier to challenge other state redistricting plans.

 

The decision continued a trend at the court, where justices have found that racial considerations improperly tainted redistricting decisions by GOP-led legislatures in Virginia, Alabama and North Carolina. Some cases involved congressional districts, others legislative districts.

 

Source: "Supreme Court rules race improperly dominated N.C. redistricting efforts", Robert Barnes, Washington Post 5/22/17

 

So your argument that "there isn't any racism in laws in the US any more" is, let's say, laughable.

 

Now, no one's arguing here that because there might be a little bit of racism involved that it's an excuse to not obey the rule of law as it stands. But you know, the framers of the Constitution understood that there's disagreement on these things, and that's why they gave broad powers to the Executive making it, yes, perfectly legal for Obama to issue orders "clarifying" how his branch was going to implement the wedge between the abstract immigration laws passed by Congress and pushed by the Judicial decisions finding fault with those laws along with the facts on the ground that make those laws not only discriminatory but down right out of sync with reality.

 

You know who the biggest backers of immigration reform have been? The Republicans. Do you know why? No, Republicans aren't bleeding-heart liberals out to save every poor discriminated-against minority around the world. No, they hear from the CEOs who say, "we need labor, and we can get it cheaper and easier from immigrants, and while we've been breaking the law and bringing them in illegally in droves, we'd like you to clear all that up so we can get the immigrants we need to keep the economy humming."

 

So, honestly, figuring out how to keep Dreamers here--finding the screams from CEOs about this over the last couple of days left as an exercise for the reader--is a *conservative* thing. Just not a "racist" thing.

 

And again, I know you're not racist and most of the Trump voters I know personally are not racist. But there are a lot of them out there, and the Republican party has been dog whistling to them for years with these, yes, laws that discriminate, and so it makes it really damn hard for them to even agree amongst themselves when they rule all three branches of government what to do, given they've promised to "build the wall" and deport all 11 million illegals. 

 

If you want the economy to thrive, you're *for* immigration reform that will actually keep most of those people here. Is that what you're for?

 

In fact, it just so happens that the US citizens who are losing jobs to the so-called “dreamers” are far more likely to be African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans than whites. Playing the race card just does not work in this case.

 

You're going to have to decide whether you believe that immigrants are good for the economy or not. One of the reasons Dreamers are threatening is that most of them have or are getting college degrees, and because whites represent a much larger percentage of the population, whether you're looking at lower-level jobs or mid-level skilled positions, they're mostly "taking" the jobs that white folks have.

 

That is if you believe they're "taking" them rather than "the economy needs them because there's demand for labor."

 

If you can only see this as "taking," well, you're not much of a capitalist.

 

 

And some, I assume, are good people, :phones:

Buffy

[OceanBreeze]

Now I know that you feel that such matters need to be analyzed solely in the abstract and that it is totally illegitimate to discuss outcomes of laws and government actions, but no you can't insist that all laws since the 1964 are by definition not racist in outcome, let alone intent.

 

You know how far back I have to go to find legal decisions finding that actual racial restriction/intent invalidated duly passed laws? Why 2017! Just look at the Texas Voter ID Law:

Or North Carolina's redistricting plan:

 

So your argument that "there isn't any racism in laws in the US any more" is, let's say, laughable.

 

 

So, honestly,

 

 

 

Honestly?

 

You don't have a clue what honesty is!

 

 I called you out before on your outright lies and dishonesty, and here you are doing it again. You just cannot control yourself, can you?

 

Here is what I wrote, exactly:

how is it racist to uphold the laws pertaining to illegal immigration? Are you saying the laws themselves are racist? The laws do not discriminate on the basis of race! You either enter the country legally or you enter it illegally; race has not one damn thing to do with it.

 

Notice the bolded part? WTF does that have to do with the Texas voter ID or the NC redistricting plan?

 

AND where did I say "there isn't any racism in laws in the US any more" which you dishonestly put in Quotes!

 

You should just f*cking ban yourself for being an annoying troll.

 

[Buffy]

I called you out before on your outright lies and dishonesty, and here you are doing it again. You just cannot control yourself, can you?

 

Here is what I wrote, exactly:

how is it racist to uphold the laws pertaining to illegal immigration? Are you saying the laws themselves are racist? The laws do not discriminate on the basis of race! You either enter the country legally or you enter it illegally; race has not one damn thing to do with it.

 

Notice the bolded part? WTF does that have to do with the Texas voter ID or the NC redistricting plan?

Well I'm sorry but right here you are saying that because the immigration laws do not explicitly mention race that they cannot be in any interpretation "racist."

 

You continue to avoid even trying to discuss the notion that laws and executive actions that do not mention race can have "racist outcomes." That is precisely why I mentioned the Texas and NC laws: they have racist outcomes.

 

And it's not me saying that, it's the Judicial branch. The one that's mostly leaning to the right, and the judges in question are in many cases Republican-appointed ones.

 

I know that the grossly oversimplified definition of racism as you prefer to draw it benefits your positions. But the courts are finding those positions wrong in spite of their not being literally written with words that specify race.

 

So as to this issue, if you say:

 

AND where did I say "there isn't any racism in laws in the US any more" which you dishonestly put in Quotes!

We have to ask: do you or don't you believe there are laws in the US that are racist? Is it only racist if it mentions race? If so, why are judges finding such laws (as the reference I provided above) finding that they are racist? Do you think such laws should be kept anyway? If so, why? If not, why the reluctance to discuss racial outcomes?

 

Do you think DACA has nothing to do with race? If so, why did you make the argument that "US citizens who are losing jobs to the so-called “dreamers” are far more likely to be African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans than whites," which as I stated above, actually isn't true? I know you were responding to "pulling the race card" but by responding with an easily checkable falsehood, you do indeed betray the fact that you seem to know racial outcomes are indeed significant, but also know it's not a good thing for the rest of your positions so you avoid it.

 

You might want to think about that.

 

You should just f*cking ban yourself for being an annoying troll.

"Well good morning to you Mr. Pot!" said Ms. Kettle.

 

You've called people "stupid" and "idiotic" for simply expressing liberal viewpoints. And you refuse to respond or engage on any arguments presented to you that counter your own positions which more than anything are unsubstantiated right-wing talking points (e.g. Obama decided to "rewrite immigration law himself, knowing well that what he was doing was illegal under the Constitution" which I clearly refuted above yet you refuse to acknowledge it).

 

You seem to be very good at dishing out hostile, derisive screeds, but to the extent you think I do the same, you seem incapable of taking it.

 

Unfortunately, my job as an Admin is to keep people with hostile attitudes at bay. To the extent that you dish this stuff out, you'll find I am a regular honey badger, but let me be clear: I'm doing my job here. 

 

If you would bother to read my posts, you'll see that I readily accept the validity of many conservative positions--and surprise, I am and have always registered Republican--and if you would just drop the mimicking of the likes of Bill O'Reilly and Judge Napolitano (to be generous), you'd find you might learn something. I've got a knowledge of politics and political science that rivals your knowledge of quantum mechanics (which is appreciated around here by many, including me), and given that we, to use the Chinese curse, "live in interesting times" it sure would be nice to stop being at war with your fellow Americans and try to find some solutions for the situation we're in, rather than just blasting them as "liberals" and "idiotic."

 

And this being offended because someone is besmirching your good name is getting tiresome. Argue or do not argue. Save the posturing for somewhere else.

 

 

"It's freezing up here. What did you use to keep warm?" "Indignation, Best fuel I know. Never burns out." :phones:

Buffy

[Maine farmer]

So we have illustrated here just how inflammatory Trump is.  I admit to my bias against Trump because I have disliked him for as long as I knew he exists, even though I was but a child when he started getting attention.

[serenesam]

I'm disappointed in President Donald Trump. DACA isn't fair to folks waiting in line and doing it the legal way with proper procedures. 

[Buffy]

I'm disappointed in President Donald Trump. DACA isn't fair to folks waiting in line and doing it the legal way with proper procedures. 

 

It's not a zero-sum game unless Congress makes it so, and it's not now, so your argument is moot.

 

 

Journalism delivers news, but not necessarily relevance, :phones:

Buffy

[Maine farmer]

As a republican, I received a poll in the mail from the Republican party about the Trump agenda.  It was multiple choice, and all of the choices were bad.  The way it was worded , it may as well have said, "You are either with us or against us."  The poll also had my name and address  printed  on it, along with a bar code and some other identification number, which I concluded meant that they do not want to know what I really think.  Will they target anyone who gives the wrong answers?

 

Oh, and they also wanted a donation, and they didn't even put a stamp on the return envelope.  It also had written on it in bold red letters "DO NOT DESTROY!"

 

I was offended to the point where I promptly shredded the poll.

[Buffy]

As a republican, I received a poll in the mail from the Republican party about the Trump agenda.  It was multiple choice, and all of the choices were bad.  

 

Since I register Republican, I got this one too, and get them regularly. I've checked and that code number is identical for all of them, although they do print your name and address on it.

 

The questions are classic "push poll" questions, which are designed to convince rather than to provide actual options. They're really pretty funny if you look at them with a cynical eye. My boyfriend registers Democratic, so we compare the mailers and while the Democratic Party letters sometimes are a little strident, they're just straight up appeals to send money without a Kids Activity Coloring Book included.

 

Don't be fooled though, both sides have years of research as to what works with their respective bases, and boy is it telling....

 

 

The campaign finance scandal in America is the global warming of American political life - with cash substituting for deadly solar radiation, :phones:

Buffy

[Maine farmer]

 

Since I register Republican, I got this one too, and get them regularly. I've checked and that code number is identical for all of them, although they do print your name and address on it.

 

The questions are classic "push poll" questions, which are designed to convince rather than to provide actual options. They're really pretty funny if you look at them with a cynical eye. My boyfriend registers Democratic, so we compare the mailers and while the Democratic Party letters sometimes are a little strident, they're just straight up appeals to send money without a Kids Activity Coloring Book included.

 

l life - with cash substituting for deadly solar radiation, :phones:

Buffy

 

Yes, they can be funny, but insulting to the intelligence of their targets.

 

The Democrats just made a huge error in a local election.  They said they were putting forth a working man to run for the office.  The Republican is self employed  , well known outside of politics , and has always been a working man.   The Democratic candidate stands no chance in that particular race.  

Edited September 28, 2017 by Farming guy

[sanctus]

  The way it was worded , it may as well have said, "You are either with us or against us." 

Sounds like the fractal of american politics: Irak: axisi of evil<-> bush saying with us (US) or against us.

Then either republican or democrat

Then even inside republican same rethoric (and am sure same for democrats).

And it goes down to the lowest levels, I remember reading a book a friend had (I admit I took a look at it first only for the title) titled "How to **** in Nature", I thought it was a joke but it wasn't. Even in that book the "with or against" was present: either you are hardcore in leaving no "footprint" behind in nature or you do not care.

 

I so miss the grey, it is all black or white...at least that is the feeling I get from all I hear  and read about the US.

I