Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Evil at the Heart of the Anti-Immigration Movement

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Evil at the Heart of the Anti-Immigration Movement

    Steven Miller is an evil person who wouldn't be a US citizen if his family hadn't emigrated to the United States. And now he is the person behind the Trump tempest against immigration. He is intolerant, condescending, and a bigot and he is not someone who should be in the White House. And he is manipulating Trump, who isn't even close to being as smart as Miller, into agreeing with his evil and exploiting Trump's own fear, racism, and religious bigotry into government policy.

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cid=spartandhp

    'When historians try to explain how opponents of immigration captured the Republican Party, they may turn to the spring of 2007, when President George W. Bush threw his waning powers behind a legalization plan and conservative populists buried it in scorn.'

    'Mr. Bush was so taken aback, he said he worried about America “losing its soul,” and immigration politics have never been the same.'
    'That spring was significant for another reason, too: An intense young man with wary, hooded eyes and fiercely anti-immigrant views graduated from college and began a meteoric rise as a Republican operative. With the timing of a screenplay, the man and the moment converged.'



    'Stephen Miller was 22 and looking for work in Washington. He lacked government experience but had media appearances on talk radio and Fox News and a history of pushing causes like 'Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week.' A first-term congresswoman from Minnesota offered him a job interview and discovered they were reading the same book: a polemic warning that Muslim immigration could mean 'the end of the world as we know it.''

    'By the end of the interview, Representative Michele Bachmann had a new press secretary. And a dozen years later, Mr. Miller, now a senior adviser to President Trump, is presiding over one of the most fervent attacks on immigration in American history.'

    'The story of Mr. Miller's rise has been told with a focus on his pugnacity and paradoxes. Known more for his enemies than his friends, he is a conservative firebrand from liberal Santa Monica, Calif., and a descendant of refugees who is seeking to eliminate refugee programs. He is a Duke graduate in bespoke suits who rails against the perfidy of so-called elites. Among those who have questioned his moral fitness are his uncle, his childhood rabbi and 3,400 fellow Duke alumni.'

    'Less attention has been paid to the forces that have abetted his rise and eroded Republican support for immigration forces-Mr. Miller has personified and advanced in a career unusually reflective of its times.'
    We are not now that strength which in old days
    Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
    Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
    To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

  • #2
    https://forums.armchairgeneral.com/f...te-nationalist
    "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

    Comment


    • #3
      We are not now that strength which in old days
      Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
      Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
      To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

      Comment


      • #4
        Here's the evil at the heart of the pro-open borders and illegal immigration movement:

        https://www.pueblosinfronteras.org/

        https://www.influencewatch.org/non-p...sin-fronteras/

        https://www.lifezette.com/2018/10/me...sin-fronteras/

        They have actual terrorists in their leadership:

        https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/la...trator-migrant

        https://www.libertyheadlines.com/alf...a-reparations/

        You want evil? It resides on the radical Left.


        Comment


        • #5
          Evil is ignoring the mountains of bodies and failed states that socialism has produced. For over 90 years the left leaning media has given cover for a demonstratively dystopian ideology.

          It has become obvious that for the left the immigration controversy is not about the immigrants but rather importing a population that will accept an authoritarian welfare state. That the corporatists and globalists see the shift to the left as an opportunity to protect their privileged relationship with the government is not helping.
          We hunt the hunters

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
            Evil is ignoring the mountains of bodies and failed states that socialism has produced. For over 90 years the left leaning media has given cover for a demonstratively dystopian ideology.

            It has become obvious that for the left the immigration controversy is not about the immigrants but rather importing a population that will accept an authoritarian welfare state. That the corporatists and globalists see the shift to the left as an opportunity to protect their privileged relationship with the government is not helping.
            This is espoused by Leftist economist Naomi Klein who wrote years ago in The Nation magazine that ownership of property moved people away from Socialism and Leftist ideas. She argued that the best way to get Leftist government was to turn people into renters, not owners.
            One of the easier ways to do that is create a large underclass of poorly educated, marginally or un-employable people dependent on government handouts.
            Large corporations and such see the best compromise here is to shift to Statist Capitalism. That is, the state decides what is produced and by whom, but the corporations remain in the hands of wealthy individuals who willingly cooperate with politicians and government to keep the status quo between them.
            The rest of society gets what they decide is "best" for it.

            The Left sees an opportunity in Climate Change (aka Gorebal Warming) to use this largely manufactured crisis to get government control over the economy and remove large chunks of private ownership (for example, reducing ownership of cars in favor of public transit) from society and in doing so move society to the Left politically.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
              This is espoused by Leftist economist Naomi Klein who wrote years ago in The Nation magazine that ownership of property moved people away from Socialism and Leftist ideas. She argued that the best way to get Leftist government was to turn people into renters, not owners.
              .
              That's a misrepresenation of what the article said. Firstly, she's not and never has been an economist. Secondly while she does agree that ownership of property was used to woo voters away from left leaning political views by Thatcher and Reagan, no where in the Nation article does she make the second claim you assign to her

              The article you claim to refer to is reprinted here:

              https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...b/01/usa.world
              Last edited by CarpeDiem; 18 Aug 19, 16:45.

              Comment


              • #9
                Originally posted by Cult Icon View Post
                Naomi Klein is a journalist.
                She has written several books and numerous articles on economics. I'd put her in the same category as Al Gore on Gorebal Warming.

                Comment


                • #10
                  Originally posted by CarpeDiem View Post

                  That's a misrepresenation of what the article said. Firstly, she's not and never has been an economist. Secondly while she does agree that ownership of property was used to woo voters away from left leaning political views by Thatcher and Reagan, no where in the Nation article does she make the second claim you assign to her

                  The article you claim to refer to is reprinted here:

                  https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...b/01/usa.world
                  Here's the article I refer to:

                  So what to do? It was Margaret Thatcher who pioneered a solution. The effort centered on Britain's public housing, or council estates, which were filled with die-hard Labour Party supporters. In a bold move, Thatcher offered strong incentives to residents to buy their council estate flats at reduced rates (much as Bush did decades later by promoting subprime mortgages). Those who could afford it became homeowners while those who couldn't faced rents almost twice as high as before, leading to an explosion of homelessness.

                  As a political strategy, it worked: the renters continued to oppose Thatcher, but polls showed that more than half of the newly minted owners did indeed switch their party affiliation to the Tories. The key was a psychological shift: they now thought like owners, and owners tend to vote Tory. The ownership society as a political project was born. …

                  The mass eviction from the ownership society has profound political implications. According to a September Pew Research poll, 48 percent of Americans say they live in a society carved into haves and have-nots--nearly twice the number of 1988. Only 45 percent see themselves as part of the haves. In other words, we are seeing a return of the very class consciousness that the ownership society was supposed to erase. The free-market ideologues have lost an extremely potent psychological tool--and progressives have gained one. Now that John Edwards is out of the presidential race, the question is, will anyone dare to use it?
                  http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2...ership-society

                  In essence, she argues that by driving people out of the ownership society as she calls it, it drives those people to adopt more Progressive and Leftist views from having been disowned.

                  Comment


                  • #11
                    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                    She has written several books and numerous articles on economics. I'd put her in the same category as Al Gore on Gorebal Warming.
                    A lot of journalists actually write books on economics- included right wing libertarians.

                    Keep in your conservative brain that you are choosing what is probably the most left wing journalist ever to prove your "points"
                    Zhitomir-Berdichev, West of Kiev: 24 Dec 1943-31 Jan 1944
                    Stalin's Favorite: The Combat History of the 2nd Guards Tank Army
                    Barbarossa Derailed I & II
                    Battle of Kalinin October 1941

                    Comment


                    • #12
                      Originally posted by Cult Icon View Post

                      A lot of journalists actually write books on economics- included right wing libertarians.

                      Keep in your conservative brain that you are choosing what is probably the most left wing journalist ever to prove your "points"
                      That's why I pointed her out. She is a snapshot of what the Left is thinking. Know the enemy and all that...

                      Comment


                      • #13
                        So you believe your fellow countrymen are your enemy because they don't think or believe as you do?
                        We are not now that strength which in old days
                        Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                        Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                        To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                        Comment


                        • #14
                          Originally posted by Massena View Post
                          You started a second thread on the same guy, why?

                          The title of this thread is wrong also. There is a difference between illegal immigration and legal immigration. The MSM is going out of it's why to confuse the sheep by making illegal immigration into legal immigration.

                          Trump is not against legal immigration. He is against illegal immigration as has all of the administration since Bush senior. From Clinton forward the presidents have been against illegal immigration.
                          "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

                          Comment


                          • #15
                            Originally posted by Massena View Post
                            So you believe your fellow countrymen are your enemy because they don't think or believe as you do?


                            It's something in Sun Tzu's The Art of War If you know your opponent's and know yourself you win every battle. Know yourself or your opponent you win sometimes. Know neither and you're a fool.

                            Well, I read the stuff Leftists publish, like Klein's books and articles, because then I know what the Left is thinking. Most Leftists, however dismiss anything not on the Left as worthless and ignore it.

                            Here's an example of how wrongheaded the Left's thinking is:

                            So, conservatives tend to see the world as dangerous and threatening, whereas liberals generally see society as a place of safety and
                            cooperation
                            .
                            https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...so-differently

                            At the heart of Leftist thinking is they want a world without worries or consequences. They want to be able to have a nice, clean, comfortable, place to live and play but want no part in being responsible for taking care of it or paying for it. Unenlightened self-interest. This is why they have no problem wanting and voting for a welfare state and higher taxes. Somebody else is going to pay for it all. Be it "The Rich," or evil corporations, it won't be the Leftist living off government largess.

                            If you want to do recreational drugs, that's fine with a Leftist. For them, any negative consequences are handled by the government's health care system and it's somebody else's problem to pay for it and take care of them.

                            Call the Peter Pan syndrome. Thus, Conservatives see Progressives and the Left as adult children who are irresponsible and lazy.

                            As you move Right people become increasingly self-reliant. Sure, the far Right takes this to a paranoid extreme, but they're essentially on their own. Conservatives see a world where you have adult responsibility for yourself and nobody else is going to take care of you. They reject higher taxes and the welfare state because they don't want what they've worked for take from them.

                            The Left sees this as a rejection by Conservatives to want to share and take care of them, as they want it to be. That leads them to see Conservatives as selfish, greedy, and uncaring.

                            Because the MSM is slanted heavily to the Left of Center, Conservatives and those on the Right get far more exposure to Leftist, Progressive ideas and values than Leftists and Progressives do to Conservative or Rightist ones. For example, a Leftist would reject Right wing talk radio which they can clearly define because it is almost unique among major media outlets for its slant. For the Conservative Rightist, finding Left wing talk radio is a chore. It hardly exists. But, they can go on television and see a dozen news channels pushing Leftist and Left of Center views with only FOX and a few others that don't.

                            So, I don't see the Left as "enemies" per se, but rather as persons espousing dangerously bad political ideas that need to be countered with reason and reasonable speech. It's simple to reject the far Right's individualism like Sovereign Citizens, or neo-Nazis because their ideas are clearly and demonstrably wrong in any society.
                            Rejecting the Left's takes more effort because they're far better at obfuscation than the far Right. They are good at making the insane and unreasonable sound reasonable so long as you don't bother to think about what they're saying.

                            Comment

                            Latest Topics

                            Collapse

                            Working...
                            X