Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Evil at the Heart of the Anti-Immigration Movement

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

  • Massena
    replied
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/newsp...tG?ocid=msn360
    'Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA) joins Alex Witt to discuss the Washington Post and the New York Timesí new articles on Stephen Miller's influence over President Trump's immigration policies. Hear why Connolly calls Miller an 'ideologue' who stokes fear in immigrant communities.'

    Leave a comment:


  • Massena
    replied
    The Trump administration likes to target the children of illegal immigrants:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/newsu...pa?ocid=msn360

    'Some top aides to President Donald Trump sought for months for a way to give states the power to block undocumented immigrant children from enrolling in public schools ó all part of the administrationís efforts to stem illegal crossings at the southern U.S. border.'

    'Trump senior adviser Stephen Miller had been a driving force behind the effort as early as 2017, pressing cabinet officials and members of the White House Domestic Policy Council repeatedly to devise a way to limit enrollment, according to several people familiar with the matter. The push was part of a menu of ideas on immigration that could be carried out without congressional approval.'

    'Ultimately, they abandoned the idea after being told repeatedly that any such effort ran afoul of a 1982 Supreme Court case guaranteeing access to public schools. But the consideration of denying hundreds of thousands of children access to education illustrates the breadth of the White Houseís push to crack down on undocumented immigrants.'

    Leave a comment:


  • Massena
    replied
    Miller's evil twin:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/newso...Ew?ocid=msn360

    'When President Donald Trumpís administration on Monday rolled out its so-called public-charge rule, which would allow the government to deny permanent residence to legal immigrants receiving public assistance, whispers of Stephen Miller were immediate.'


    'Miller, the 33-year-old Trump adviser, has created many of the White Houseís most controversial immigration policies over the past two and half years, and sure enough, when Acting Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Ken Cuccinelli announced the plan, which is scheduled to take effect in 60 days, reports detailing Millerís handiwork were not far behind. It was as though Cuccinelli, in briefing journalists on the rule, had served as little more than a suited vessel for Millerís worldview. But to shift focus away from Cuccinelli is to ignore the very real convictions he brings to bear in this administration.'

    'A former senior White House official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to be frank, told me that one of the chief challenges in staffing this administration has been finding people whose fervor for hard-line immigration policies matches that of the president, and whose rťsumť includes even one line of government experience. Miller has thus found himself on an island at times in his attempt to execute his more extreme visions for the nationís immigration system. (A screaming match on the topic of, say, the proposed Mexican border wall is not unusual, said the source, who was party to one such exchange.)'

    'Enter Cuccinelli. The former Virginia attorney general joined the Trump administration in late May. His background includes trying to eliminate birthright citizenship, questioning whether Barack Obama was born in the United States, and proposing to make speaking Spanish on the job a fireable offense. Accordingly, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell advised the president against nominating Cuccinelli to any post that required Senate confirmation. To some, Cuccinelliís arrival meant that Miller had, at long last, found the consummate ideological ally. (A representative for Cuccinelli declined my request for a phone interview with the director.)'

    'Cuccinelli may well have been created in a Trump-branded petri dish. Heís spent decades advocating for far-right positions on a variety of social issues, and the 50-year-old practicing Catholic enjoys widespread support among conservative evangelicals. Cuccinelli used his 2013 loss to Terry McAuliffe in the Virginia gubernatorial race to reinvent himself as a conservative pundit, and for the past few years has offered a reliably pro-Trump perspective across cable networks (a bonus for anyone seeking this presidentís favor). As someone who built much of his popularity on polarizing immigration policies and incendiary rhetoric, Cuccinelli was as natural a choice as any for an administration hoping to make progress on the presidentís signature issue ahead of the 2020 election.'

    Leave a comment:


  • Massena
    replied
    The puppet master:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/newsp...B0?ocid=msn360

    'At President Trumpís speeches and rallies, Stephen Miller often can be found backstage, watching the teleprompter operator. As other White House staffers chat or look at their phones, Millerís attention remains glued to the controls.'

    'The energy and crowd-thrilling parts of Trumpís speeches usually happen during his impromptu diversions from the planned address. When Trump veers, colleagues say, Miller sometimes directs the operator to scroll higher or lower through the speech, so when the president is ready to pick it up again, he will hit those passages and make those points.'

    'Miller knows where he wants the president to go.'

    Leave a comment:


  • Trung Si
    replied
    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?
    That should remind you of someone, mirror, mirror!

    Leave a comment:


  • Cult Icon
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

    That's why I pointed her out. She is a snapshot of what the Left is thinking. Know the enemy and all that...
    She is not your deluded "snapshot" of what your enemies are thinking. She is a radical. "The Nation" is one of the most left wing magazines in the nation.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Massena
    replied
    So you believe your fellow countrymen are your enemy because they don't think or believe as you do?

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    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...

    Leave a comment:


  • Cult Icon
    replied
    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"

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    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. Ö

    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cult Icon
    replied
    Naomi Klein is a journalist.

    Leave a comment:


  • CarpeDiem
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X