Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 180: The Summit All Fears

(+) Yeah! (+)

I mean if you have something to say, don't subtweet it like a spineless ass
---

A spineless ass sounds like a good thing to have. Would reduce a lot of tailbone injuries
---

Tailbone injuries are the worst
---

red sox 777 posted...

What I'm saying is often, "X is what someone thinks, and this is why they think it. You should understand how they think."

ok, but when you do this it probably helps a ton if you make it very clear that you're doing this. or at least more clear than the way you're doing it now.

if i say "gay marriage is wrong because there's a bunch of anti-homosexuality stuff in the bible" without any context, i'll probably get tons of people going "wtf?!?" if i add "this is the logic certain christians use to justify being anti-gay marriage," people probably won't have a problem with my post.
---

red sox 777 posted...

It's not dishonest unless I'm saying, "X is what I think." What I'm saying is often, "X is what someone thinks, and this is why they think it. You should understand how they think."

I think you'd receive a lot less venom if you stated this explicitly at the onset, instead saving it as a gotcha to use once the argument is 50 posts in. This advice assumes you want to minimize rather than maximize the venom you receive though, and I've seen no indication of that.
---

Idk guys i think it'd make sitting down more difficult if your spine didn't go all the way down

But I'm actually not very well versed in human physiology so

Furthermore, understanding why someone thinks that other groups of humans are subhuman and not deserving of basic rights doesn't do me any good. Those people are not going to change.
---

red sox 777 posted...

I make contrarian posts but not dishonest ones (unless you count obvious jokes like my global warming/evolution polls). I think maybe people perceive my posts as having a devil's advocate flavor is that my focus is often quite different from theirs. For instance, I post a lot about how Republicans win elections and win in Congress. Some people want me to take a personal moral position on Republicans, and I don't do that when discussing election strategy, because it's irrelevant.

Hard disagree.

You do take such positions and I think your conflation of these things is behind a great deal of the friction. As an example, you have repeatedly stated you think the Electoral College is a genius idea. This is a position. There's a difference between discussing the advantages the Electoral College confers to the Republican Party as it relates to electoral strategy and politics and proclaiming it a genius idea/good thing.

I often have the impression that you are championing certain policies and ideas because they benefit the Republican party. That's a very different thing than discussing how they benefit the Republican party. The latter can generate plenty of productive discussion. The former - particularly when I feel you retreat behind claims that you're just trying to produce discussion - is what generates the friction and annoyance.

Essentially, it comes off to me that you treat politics as a sports game and Republicans are your team and you root for them but try to turn around and say you're simply trying to objectively discuss how they win.
---

I do love the electoral college, and would probably support it even if it favored Democrats. I'll try to clarify what positions are mine in the future, since it seems a bunch of people think it hasn't been clear.
---

Late to the party but:

Shaduln posted...

red sox 777 posted...

I'm pretty sure that Corrik and I generate 90% of the discussion in this topic. The rest is just people posting news articles.

I would prefer just the news.

News articles are the only reason I ever check this topic. There's a LOT of news to keep track of these days, and having a place that gathers news of the topics I care about - and that is generally filtered by people who don't subscribe to bullshit sources - is very useful. More of that, please. Less of inane conversations about nothing that last for-fucking-ever.
---

Imagine it is the year of our lord 2018 and news is so censored and hard to find that we must come to an obscure gaming social board to see what news from mainstream sources and biased twitter feeds that liberals on the video game board wish to present in order to "get the news".

I mean, obviously people do not come to a social board to socialize and to discuss things like the board is intended. Instead it is a liberal biased aggregate news feed in which we wish to have on the social board!
---

lol
---

??
---

No one is forcing you to leave your containment topic, dude
---

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/17/politics/melania-trump-children-separated-immigration/index.html

I know someone you could talk to this about, Melania.
---

"Both sides" is so dumb. It's even sillier because to anyone who isn't drunk on the kool-aid should recognize that Republicans control the government right now. They could change it overnight if they actually wanted to.
---

How does Trump get away with blaming the Democrats for the state of immigration law, exactly? I mean without sounding like a literal crazy person.
---

redrocket posted...

How does Trump get away with blaming the Democrats for the state of immigration law, exactly? I mean without sounding like a literal crazy person.

Do you mean what is the mechanism by which he is claiming this?

Because he always sounds like a crazy person
---

redrocket posted...

How does Trump get away with blaming the Democrats for the state of immigration law, exactly? I mean without sounding like a literal crazy person.

Well, I mean the immigration law has been that way for decades. Some presidents chose to make exceptions regarding it because they feared media backlash if they followed it to the letter of the law. Donald Trump just is imposing that law with a Zero Tolerance. Though Trump has reportedly been wanting the law changed also to allow parents to be detained with children during their cases. Apparently Obama tried this and was shot down by the courts, so he continued with the exceptions.
---

Following the law or orders doesn't excuse a crime against humanity.

If this were happening in a country in Africa, the party of "family values" would be rightfully calling that government monstrous.
---

Corrik posted...

Though Trump has reportedly been wanting the law changed also to allow parents to be detained with children during their cases. Apparently Obama tried this and was shot down by the courts, so he continued with the exceptions.

I am struggling to find a source that says Obama separated children from parents.

Like...here's an interview quote denying it:

former President Barack Obama's domestic policy director, Cecilia Muoz, stated unequivocally that separating children from their parents was not a policy the Obama administration followed.

"The Obama administration did not do that, no. We did not separate children from their parents," Muoz said.

Here's a source saying that it happened only in cases of possible domestic violence:

Separating parents from children was rare under the Obama administration and in the early part of the Trump administration, usually reserved only for cases where the safety of a child was in question. Nearly 1,800 immigrant families were separated over 17 months prior to February, according to a Reuters report.

Here's one that says the law existed as far back as 2005, but both the Bush and Obama administrations did not enforce it:

The zero tolerance practice of immediately imprisoning, prosecuting, and deporting immigrants who illegally enter the United States has been around since 2005, but the George W. Bush and Obama administrations were morally and pragmatically opposed to separating immigrant children from their families, even if some adult immigrants were clearly taking advantage of that compassion.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/06/separating-families-at-border-was-always-part-of-the-plan.html

Don't get me wrong, the Obama administration had a pretty bad record from human rights advocates over its immigration policy, but not on this particular point. (More on stuff like making 3 year olds represent themselves in court--the Obama administration definitely did that). Separating children from parents seems to have become policy part way through the Trump administration (not when Trump first took office, about a year later).
---

metroid composite posted...

Corrik posted...

Though Trump has reportedly been wanting the law changed also to allow parents to be detained with children during their cases. Apparently Obama tried this and was shot down by the courts, so he continued with the exceptions.

I am struggling to find a source that says Obama separated children from parents.

Like...here's an interview quote denying it:

former President Barack Obama's domestic policy director, Cecilia Muoz, stated unequivocally that separating children from their parents was not a policy the Obama administration followed.

"The Obama administration did not do that, no. We did not separate children from their parents," Muoz said.

Here's a source saying that it happened only in cases of possible domestic violence:

Separating parents from children was rare under the Obama administration and in the early part of the Trump administration, usually reserved only for cases where the safety of a child was in question. Nearly 1,800 immigrant families were separated over 17 months prior to February, according to a Reuters report.

Here's one that says the law existed as far back as 2005, but both the Bush and Obama administrations did not enforce it:

The zero tolerance practice of immediately imprisoning, prosecuting, and deporting immigrants who illegally enter the United States has been around since 2005, but the George W. Bush and Obama administrations were morally and pragmatically opposed to separating immigrant children from their families, even if some adult immigrants were clearly taking advantage of that compassion.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/06/separating-families-at-border-was-always-part-of-the-plan.html

Don't get me wrong, the Obama administration had a pretty bad record from human rights advocates over its immigration policy, but not on this particular point. (More on stuff like making 3 year olds represent themselves in court--the Obama administration definitely did that). Separating children from parents seems to have become policy part way through the Trump administration (not when Trump first took office, about a year later).

Yeah, I think Obama got kind of a pass considering how hard line he actually was on immigration. Both Clinton and sanders basically campaigned on Obama is bad on immigration because of this.

But I also couldnt find anything about Obama enforcing this particular policy of Trumps. I could be wrong, but it was news to me and I didnt see anything when I searched for it.
---

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Leadership-camps-unproven-painful-12985044.php

crazy stuff
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

But I also couldnt find anything about Obama enforcing this particular policy of Trumps. I could be wrong, but it was news to me and I didnt see anything when I searched for it.

That's because he didn't. Enforcing criminal laws to deter asylum seekers goes against article 31 of the Refugee Convention.
---

metroid composite posted...

I am struggling to find a source that says Obama separated children from parents.

Because he didn't. You misunderstood what I said. He tried to get a ruling to allow longer detainment of families together and was ruled against to detain them together longer. Thus, he kept the exceptions running for those with children.
---

"Before long, the Obama administration would face legal challenges, and be forced to stop detaining families indefinitely. A federal judge in Washington ordered the administration in 2015 to stop detaining asylum-seeking Central American mothers and children in order to deter others from their region from coming into the United States."

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/06/16/us/politics/family-separation-trump.html
---

Yeah, thanks, I misunderstood your point. I was already aware of his less the stellar record on immigration.

Or pretty good record on immigration, I guess, depending on your viewpoint.
---

I never understood the rights attempts to paint Obama as weak on immigration, when he wasnt really more liberal than George W Bush and was in some ways more hardline.
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

I never understood the rights attempts to paint Obama as weak on immigration, when he wasnt really more liberal than George W Bush and was in some ways more hardline.

I think it was more a comparison to Hillary's open borders private talks. That said, you can be further right as you see now. Obviously, I agree with what is going on now but would like for a non court stricken indefinite detainment for families during cases or for a more streamlined case system where it didn't take so long to finally get the proper outcomes made.

As someone has said (I think Trump), just because you have kids, you shouldn't be immune to immigration laws.
---

Agreeing with actual concentration camps for children sure is a nuclear take, even for a b8 conservative.
---

Peace___Frog posted...

Agreeing with actual concentration camps for children sure is a nuclear take, even for a b8 conservative.

The law is forcing that hand and it needs changed. The moderate conservative bill trying to go through now is attempting to address it from what I have heard.

Yes, the law is the law. At some point, the blame should he assessed where it belongs. As a parent, you shouldn't be trying to do this with your children. Banking on a loophole is their fault.
---

Why is it that there are so few conservatives who are actually decent people?
---

Ashethan posted...

Why is it that there are so few conservatives who are actually decent people?

Because everyone who is a conservative has to be a monster to you so you can feel morally superior and correct. Just how it is for your side. You can't debate against your side without being a piece of shit. It is the joy of being a liberal. You are always right and everyone who disagrees is a terrible person.
---

https://twitter.com/secnielsen/status/1008467318744240128?s=21

You are not breaking the law by seeking asylum at a port of entry.

This is true

But she goes on to state that they havent been separating children from parents in cases of people seeking asylum

Which is false
---

They control both houses. They forced their health insurance thing through. There's no excuse for this continuing.

And i strongly doubt that the law calls for the construction of a tent city for refugees. That's this administration's policy.
---

Corrik posted...

Ashethan posted...

Why is it that there are so few conservatives who are actually decent people?

Because everyone who is a conservative has to be a monster to you so you can feel morally superior and correct. Just how it is for your side. You can't debate against your side without being a piece of shit. It is the joy of being a liberal. You are always right and everyone who disagrees is a terrible person.

To be fair, your actions and attitude would be monstrous even if you supported liberal viewpoints, not just politically, but in non-political aspects of your time on board 8. You just happen to support conservative ones because either A. conservative viewpoints are, in and of themselves monstrous, or B. you're just a troll choosing contrarian viewpoints solely to rile up a liberal majority.
---

Peace___Frog posted...

Agreeing with actual concentration camps for children sure is a nuclear take, even for a b8 conservative.

He saw he had some competition earlier and needed to up the ante.
---

Corrik posted...

Ashethan posted...

Why is it that there are so few conservatives who are actually decent people?

Because everyone who is a conservative has to be a monster to you so you can feel morally superior and correct. Just how it is for your side. You can't debate against your side without being a piece of shit. It is the joy of being a liberal. You are always right and everyone who disagrees is a terrible person.

Doesnt your girlfriend think everyone who is pro-choice is a monster? We just think anyone who is pro-internment camps is a monster.
---

Ashethan posted...

Why is it that there are so few conservatives who are actually decent people?

This is a potentially dangerous point of view.

Corrik posted...

Ashethan posted...

Why is it that there are so few conservatives who are actually decent people?

Because everyone who is a conservative has to be a monster to you so you can feel morally superior and correct. Just how it is for your side. You can't debate against your side without being a piece of shit. It is the joy of being a liberal. You are always right and everyone who disagrees is a terrible person.

This is sadly no different than the majority of conservatives though. People who are pro choice dont have a different point of view on life or autonomy, but are monstrous baby killers without morals. It isnt an issue exclusive to one side.
---

Corrik posted...

Ashethan posted...

Why is it that there are so few conservatives who are actually decent people?

Because everyone who is a conservative has to be a monster to you so you can feel morally superior and correct. Just how it is for your side. You can't debate against your side without being a piece of shit. It is the joy of being a liberal. You are always right and everyone who disagrees is a terrible person.

"Liberals want to destroy the country."

"Liberalism is a cancer."

"Liberalism is a mental disorder."

Nah, it's just the Left making broad, offensive statements about the other "tribe".
---

Peace___Frog posted...

They control both houses. They forced their health insurance thing through. There's no excuse for this continuing.

And i strongly doubt that the law calls for the construction of a tent city for refugees. That's this administration's policy.

You ask me. It should be bipartisan. It isn't. And there is filibusters for less than 60.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik posted...

Ashethan posted...

Why is it that there are so few conservatives who are actually decent people?

Because everyone who is a conservative has to be a monster to you so you can feel morally superior and correct. Just how it is for your side. You can't debate against your side without being a piece of shit. It is the joy of being a liberal. You are always right and everyone who disagrees is a terrible person.

"Liberals want to destroy the country."

"Liberalism is a cancer."

"Liberalism is a mental disorder."

Nah, it's just the Left making broad, offensive statements about the other "tribe".

Cool. No one is saying that here on the conservative side. But the equivalent has been said many times on the liberal side here. Maybe we can equate what is actually going on in this topic vs the whataboutism that happens elsewhere. Thanks.
---

Corrik posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

I never understood the rights attempts to paint Obama as weak on immigration, when he wasnt really more liberal than George W Bush and was in some ways more hardline.

I think it was more a comparison to Hillary's open borders private talks. That said, you can be further right as you see now. Obviously, I agree with what is going on now but would like for a non court stricken indefinite detainment for families during cases or for a more streamlined case system where it didn't take so long to finally get the proper outcomes made.

As someone has said (I think Trump), just because you have kids, you shouldn't be immune to immigration laws.

Do you understand why they are trying to immigrate to the US though? Why would they bring their kids here, in your opinion?
---

Corrik posted...

Maybe we can equate what is actually going on in this topic vs the whataboutism that happens elsewhere. Thanks.

Thought you people hated echochamers.
---

Actually I retract what I said.

Im not gonna call people monsters. No more dehumanization.

People who support child internment camps have very troubling and heartless opinions
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

This is a potentially dangerous point of view.

It's tragically true on this board though

But I think the decent conservatives also have a lot to answer for. Apparently like baubeta is one, for instance. People like him allow conservative discussion to be dominated by people known for other, previous reasons to be bad or gimmick posters.
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

Corrik posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

I never understood the rights attempts to paint Obama as weak on immigration, when he wasnt really more liberal than George W Bush and was in some ways more hardline.

I think it was more a comparison to Hillary's open borders private talks. That said, you can be further right as you see now. Obviously, I agree with what is going on now but would like for a non court stricken indefinite detainment for families during cases or for a more streamlined case system where it didn't take so long to finally get the proper outcomes made.

As someone has said (I think Trump), just because you have kids, you shouldn't be immune to immigration laws.

Do you understand why they are trying to immigrate to the US though? Why would they bring their kids here, in your opinion?

I get it. But if they want to come here then your option is to do it via proper ways. I get why people murder some people sometimes. Doesn't mean the law doesn't apply to them.
---

Corrik posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik posted...

Ashethan posted...

Why is it that there are so few conservatives who are actually decent people?

Because everyone who is a conservative has to be a monster to you so you can feel morally superior and correct. Just how it is for your side. You can't debate against your side without being a piece of shit. It is the joy of being a liberal. You are always right and everyone who disagrees is a terrible person.

"Liberals want to destroy the country."

"Liberalism is a cancer."

"Liberalism is a mental disorder."

Nah, it's just the Left making broad, offensive statements about the other "tribe".

Cool. No one is saying that here on the conservative side. But the equivalent has been said many times on the liberal side here. Maybe we can equate what is actually going on in this topic vs the whataboutism that happens elsewhere. Thanks.

Vlado, Ulti, and MWC have all definitely said it multiple times. YOU may not have said it, but I can also name multiple people not saying what Ashe is saying here. Thanks.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Im not gonna call people monsters. No more dehumanization.

What about Nazis tho
---

Corrik posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

Corrik posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

I never understood the rights attempts to paint Obama as weak on immigration, when he wasnt really more liberal than George W Bush and was in some ways more hardline.

I think it was more a comparison to Hillary's open borders private talks. That said, you can be further right as you see now. Obviously, I agree with what is going on now but would like for a non court stricken indefinite detainment for families during cases or for a more streamlined case system where it didn't take so long to finally get the proper outcomes made.

As someone has said (I think Trump), just because you have kids, you shouldn't be immune to immigration laws.

Do you understand why they are trying to immigrate to the US though? Why would they bring their kids here, in your opinion?

I get it. But if they want to come here then your option is to do it via proper ways. I get why people murder some people sometimes. Doesn't mean the law doesn't apply to them.

Woooooooooooooow
---

Corrik posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

Corrik posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

I never understood the rights attempts to paint Obama as weak on immigration, when he wasnt really more liberal than George W Bush and was in some ways more hardline.

I think it was more a comparison to Hillary's open borders private talks. That said, you can be further right as you see now. Obviously, I agree with what is going on now but would like for a non court stricken indefinite detainment for families during cases or for a more streamlined case system where it didn't take so long to finally get the proper outcomes made.

As someone has said (I think Trump), just because you have kids, you shouldn't be immune to immigration laws.

Do you understand why they are trying to immigrate to the US though? Why would they bring their kids here, in your opinion?

I get it. But if they want to come here then your option is to do it via proper ways. I get why people murder some people sometimes. Doesn't mean the law doesn't apply to them.

There is a difference between murder and attempting to cone to another country because your country is dangerous and you dont want your children to die. Not all laws are created equal, and Im more likely to forgive someone who jaywalked than someone who is a murderer.

This is particularly true when I think our own immigration system is too onerous, particularly for people seeking asylum.
---