Maybe the most appalling thing I have heard Trump say, and that's saying a lot.

I'd vote for him again over Hilary...but man oh man, that's not a good guy.

You can have a debate about the merits of allowing more immigrants who are self sufficient and fewer immigrants who have nothing, but to use that language in that setting...says a lot about him, and it doesn't say anything good.

If he could keep his damn mouth shut and just get populist stuff done, the GOP would be looking at a landslide in the midterms. I hope he doesn't run again. Hand it over to Pence and Nikki Haley.

I suspect the people leaving the countries he's referring to would agree with him...that's why they are leaving or attempting to

"an estimated 80 percent of Haitians live in absolute poverty."

Make America white again, that's really what he meant to say during his campaign. Yesterday's comments by Trump are just another example of his white is right attitude and I just can't imagine working in his administration waiting for the next completely inappropriate comment or tweet knowing that you must shamelessly defend or twist what he said into something he really (yeah sure) meant.

I suspect the people leaving the countries he's referring to would agree with him...that's why they are leaving or attempting to

"an estimated 80 percent of Haitians live in absolute poverty."

I agree Haiti is a sh*thole country. But i think he said something like "why are we letting people in from these sh*thole countries". The answer to that, and it's sad that he doesn't already know this...is empathy.

Another acceptable answer would be, "because that's what America is about - opportunity".

Yet a third answer would be "we have sh*thole cities in America. People who come here from other sh*thole countries, are far more likely to become productive citizens and send their kids to medical school, than drug addicted welfare recipients currently living in Chicago. Because many immigrants come here and cannot believe how awesome it is, whereas people already here, take it for granted".

Make America white again, that's really what he meant to say during his campaign. Yesterday's comments by Trump are just another example of his white is right attitude and I just can't imagine working in his administration waiting for the next completely inappropriate comment or tweet knowing that you must shamelessly defend or twist what he said into something he really (yeah sure) meant.

Black unemployment is at an historical low. If he's a white supremacist, he's not a very good white supremacist.

He's an unbelievable jerk.

Archie Bunker

If he said it he needs to publicly apologize in a press conference. Uncalled for.

I agree Haiti is a sh*thole country. But i think he said something like "why are we letting people in from these sh*thole countries". The answer to that, and it's sad that he doesn't already know this...is empathy.

Immigration based on empathy is a formula which equates "empathy" with "self-destruction."

Another acceptable answer would be, "because that's what America is about - opportunity".

Opportunity is one of the benefits bestowed on the citizens of this country because of what America is "about"--freedom. We cannot bestow that benefit on the rest of the world. Freedom was bought at a bloody cost. Giving it to those who are not willing to fight for it, reduces its worth to its opposite--dependence.

Yet a third answer would be "we have sh*thole cities in America. People who come here from other sh*thole countries, are far more likely to become productive citizens and send their kids to medical school, than drug addicted welfare recipients currently living in Chicago. Because many immigrants come here and cannot believe how awesome it is, whereas people already here, take it for granted".

When we replace our sheithole citizens with immigrants, many of who are sheitholes, many of who are productive, we doom our sheitholes to permanent dependence instead of giving them a kick in their sheithole and making them produce or perish.

Immigration should not be based on nicely worded talking points. Accepting sheithole immigrants is stupid. Bringing in the cream of the crop from sheitholes deprives those holes of the very people they need to solve their sh*tty problems.

Archie Bunker

I think that's a great analogy. Except Trump is doing more to help the economy (which helps a huge number of us, not just the wealthy, and the media are ignoring that) than Archie Bunker ever could.

When we replace our sheithole citizens with immigrants, many of who are sheitholes, many of who are productive, we doom our sheitholes to permanent dependence instead of giving them a kick in their sheithole and making them produce or perish.

Immigration should not be based on nicely worded talking points. Accepting sheithole immigrants is stupid. Bringing in the cream of the crop from sheitholes deprives those holes of the very people they need to solve their sh*tty problems.

"Immigration based on empathy is a formula which equates "empathy" with "self-destruction."

I'm not following you. I wouldn't say we offer citizenship to every human being we happen to feel sorry for. What I am saying is that providing an opportunity for some people who were born unlucky, is noble, it's American, and it's the right thing to do, and I have no issue paying taxes to support it. I don't want to limit immigration to wealthy white people.



"We cannot bestow that benefit on the rest of the world"

I never heard anyone suggest we could. Trump seemed to suggest we shouldn't bestow it to people of color born in bad places. I'm sad to see you defending that.

"Giving it to those who are not willing to fight for it"

I don't know that immigrants are a lot less patriotic than the rest of us. The right kind of immigrant (poor through no fault of his own, who comes here and makes something of himself) has more reason to love this country than most of us. I'm not talking about Mexican illegals who come over to deal meth. I'm talking about, if I can stereotype, Asians and Indians who come here with nothing, and in one generation, their kids are in medical school. There's a lot of those people out there. That's who I want. They're not all white, they don't all currently live in Norway.

Maybe he didn't say what is being reported, it wouldn't be the first time the media lied to make him look bad. Nor would it be beyond him to say something that vile.

I wanted to confirm this so I googled “trump , #^&#^&#^&#^&hole” . All I came up with were his hotel reviews.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The WH is not worried as a spokesman reportedly said that it will resonate w/Trump's base. Trump denies saying it. Durban basically calls him a liar.

Repub. leaders quite on this (not shocked at that). He did say Graham pushed back.

Maybe I'll go read an essay on how moral the Repub. are.

that essay is basically just like how the Bible teaches morals, but with a lot of asterixs and the words “except if”.
Do on to others *except if they are gay, poor, or generally unlike you.

Help the poor *except if they are___________

Be non violent *except if they live in lands that hold great natural reaouces.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Trump should google famous immigrants who have made significant contributions in the USA, or maybe he would prefer there never was an Audubon society in the first place; throw that Haitian out.

I agree we need proper vetting, but I would hazard a guess some of these poor immigrants if given the opportunity will work and study their poor butts off and might be that one person who finally comes up with a cure for something we have been searching for for decades.

I think all of our "Noble" liberals should go one step further. It's not fair if we take their people in, without doing something more to help these sheithole countries. I believe that all of our Noble and caring liberal friends should volunteer to do a 1 for 1 swap with the US, for every person we take in, we send them one highly qualified liberal or socialist to improve the sheithole country that the immigrant came from.

Or even better, also add to this, each immigrant is assigned a loving caring liberal sponsor to help them in their goal at becoming successful members of the community.

This would be a win win for everyone.
The sheithole countries immigrants can come here and be mentored properly to become contributing Democrat voters.
Our caring liberal friends feel better about themselves as they improve a sheithole country.
While the rest of us, can sit back and relax knowing that all of our liberal friends are out doing "the greater good" while we care to national defense and the economy

You need to watch "You've been Trumped" to learn how Trump thinks and how much he cares about others.
Just from another ****hole country, Scotland

I think all of our "Noble" liberals should go one step further. It's not fair if we take their people in, without doing something more to help these sheithole countries. I believe that all of our Noble and caring liberal friends should volunteer to do a 1 for 1 swap with the US, for every person we take in, we send them one highly qualified liberal or socialist to improve the sheithole country that the immigrant came from.

Or even better, also add to this, each immigrant is assigned a loving caring liberal sponsor to help them in their goal at becoming successful members of the community.

This would be a win win for everyone.
The sheithole countries immigrants can come here and be mentored properly to become contributing Democrat voters.
Our caring liberal friends feel better about themselves as they improve a sheithole country.
While the rest of us, can sit back and relax knowing that all of our liberal friends are out doing "the greater good" while we care to national defense and the economy

Better yet. Why don’t you spend some time in a #^&#^&#^&#^&hole country. Learn to appreciate how you are viewed by the rest of the world and then if you can grasp empathy, perhaps you will understand the roots of terrorism and why terrorists attack innocent Americans
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Better yet. Why don’t you spend some time in a #^&#^&#^&#^&hole country. Learn to appreciate how you are viewed by the rest of the world and then if you can grasp empathy, perhaps you will understand the roots of terrorism and why terrorists attack innocent Americans
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Usually eveyone just ignores him.

You guys better get to work if you don't want immigrants.
They typically have more kids.
I did my share, I have 5 kids all gainfully employed.
Paul Ryan’s recipe for a robust economy: Have more babies
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/paul-ryans-recipe-for-a-robust-economy-have-more-babies/2017/12/15/dcd767b4-e1dc-11e7-89e8-edec16379010_story.html?utm_term=.cc3963004393

Better yet. Why don’t you spend some time in a #^&#^&#^&#^&hole country. Learn to appreciate how you are viewed by the rest of the world and then if you can grasp empathy, perhaps you will understand the roots of terrorism and why terrorists attack innocent Americans
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

20 years active duty navy, stationed in Japan for 6 years, completed three 6 month deployments to the Gulf and three 6 month deployments to South America. I have been to just about every country in South America and Asia. We as a country cannot feed and help the world by bringing their people to America. Our resources are finite and in the end all you will do is make the US just as bad.

We need to stop giving "handouts" and start giving jobs and opportunity. Want to immigrate to the US, we should have a job site, where people can view jobs and locations, apply for the job, get hired, pass a back ground check and poof, now you are a legal immigrant that is helping the country and not hindering it.

We are the "Land of Opportunity", not "Lactation Nation" where we breast feed you from cradle to grave. Try to feed the world and you will end up very dried up and sagging to your knees.

Immigration should be connected with employment and opportunity and not based entirely on charity.

20 years active duty navy, stationed in Japan for 6 years, completed three 6 month deployments to the Gulf and three 6 month deployments to South America. I have been to just about every country in South America and Asia. We as a country cannot feed and help the world by bringing their people to America. Our resources are finite and in the end all you will do is make the US just as bad.

We need to stop giving "handouts" and start giving jobs and opportunity. Want to immigrate to the US, we should have a job site, where people can view jobs and locations, apply for the job, get hired, pass a back ground check and poof, now you are a legal immigrant that is helping the country and not hindering it.

We are the "Land of Opportunity", not "Lactation Nation" where we breast feed you from cradle to grave. Try to feed the world and you will end up very dried up and sagging to your knees.

Immigration should be connected with employment and opportunity and not based entirely on charity.

Thank you for your service. And yes, jobs would be nice. But wait. Done you want to make America great and do t those jobs need to be here in the US?

This is the conundrum.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

20 years active duty navy, stationed in Japan for 6 years, completed three 6 month deployments to the Gulf and three 6 month deployments to South America. I have been to just about every country in South America and Asia. We as a country cannot feed and help the world by bringing their people to America. Our resources are finite and in the end all you will do is make the US just as bad.

We need to stop giving "handouts" and start giving jobs and opportunity. Want to immigrate to the US, we should have a job site, where people can view jobs and locations, apply for the job, get hired, pass a back ground check and poof, now you are a legal immigrant that is helping the country and not hindering it.

We are the "Land of Opportunity", not "Lactation Nation" where we breast feed you from cradle to grave. Try to feed the world and you will end up very dried up and sagging to your knees.

Immigration should be connected with employment and opportunity and not based entirely on charity.

First, thanks for your service. I agree that immigration should be tied to jobs, value or education. I certainly agree we enable far too many in this country to just coast on the free ride, but while I don't know the percentages; I'd bet the majority of those freeloaders are born and breed right here. I agree with states tying medicaid to jobs or volunteer work, if you are able bodied you should be working for the free meal or housing.

This thread started out of disgust for the comments made by our super sensitive POTUS, I don't think we were talking about feeding the world. Helping a select group of motivated and smart individuals get out of their sh*thole countries to either help our economy or to get educated to return and help their country is smart and proactive on our part. The more educated and resourceful immigrants we return to help their sh*thole countries, the less of a burden they are to those countries assisting them financially or with relief efforts.

Thank you for your service. And yes, jobs would be nice. But wait. Done you want to make America great and do t those jobs need to be here in the US?

This is the conundrum.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jobs and opportunity are good for Americans and legal immigrants alike.

If they are immigrating to the US, then yes the jobs should be in the US.

"Immigration based on empathy is a formula which equates "empathy" with "self-destruction."

I'm not following you. I wouldn't say we offer citizenship to every human being we happen to feel sorry for. What I am saying is that providing an opportunity for some people who were born unlucky, is noble, it's American, and it's the right thing to do, and I have no issue paying taxes to support it. I don't want to limit immigration to wealthy white people.

You said " The answer to that, and it's sad that he doesn't already know this...is empathy." You didn't qualify the word "empathy". So now you restrict it to not everyone we happen to feel sorry for. That is not helpful. Which ones who we feel sorry for should we empathize with? There are probably more born unlucky people in other countries than the entire population of the U.S.--several times over. What's so noble about picking and choosing which ones we will make lucky . . . and letting the rest stay luckless? What's so "right" about that? And why is that American? And if it is, when did it become so? Historically, from the inception of this country, immigration "policy" has been very selective and very limited--and there was no mention of "empathy" in it.


"We cannot bestow that benefit on the rest of the world"

I never heard anyone suggest we could. Trump seemed to suggest we shouldn't bestow it to people of color born in bad places. I'm sad to see you defending that.

You are not clear about what you suggest. You have not specified limits to empathy. It implied a suggestion, with your broad reason for immigration being "empathy," that we should indeed bestow our freedom on those who are unlucky.

As for your being sad about what you see as my defending (what Trump "seemed" to "suggest") discrimination against non-whites--I am a bit sad to see that you are drifting away from one of the things I admire about Catholicism--its historical scholasticism--that rigor of thought and clarity which did not impute undesirable words and thoughts to others when those words were not spoken. I realize that your "I don't want to limit immigration to wealthy white people" is your typical hyperbole. But I don't appreciate that you are implying, or actually saying, that I am defending racism.

The part of the world my ancestors came from was a main crossroad of conquests from Asia, the Middle East, northern and western Europe. I, no doubt, have the blood of many nations and races flowing through my veins.

And I live in Southwest Detroit, which is mostly Latino, and I cherish my Mexican neighbors. And my several black friends, in this basically black city, are a comfort and source of comradery.

And I don't have a patrimony or heritage of wealth, nor any personal ties or admiration for it, nor even a desire for it. Nor have I said or implied any defense of racism nor a preference for wealthy people. Neither do I dislike or disparage them.

So you needn't try to school me or scold me about a defense of racism.


"Giving it to those who are not willing to fight for it"

I don't know that immigrants are a lot less patriotic than the rest of us. The right kind of immigrant (poor through no fault of his own, who comes here and makes something of himself) has more reason to love this country than most of us. I'm not talking about Mexican illegals who come over to deal meth. I'm talking about, if I can stereotype, Asians and Indians who come here with nothing, and in one generation, their kids are in medical school. There's a lot of those people out there. That's who I want. They're not all white, they don't all currently live in Norway.

Maybe I don't have a reason to be sure, but I am sure that Trump wants those kind of people that you want as immigrants. What he doesn't want is massive thousands (of any kind) immigrating here within a vey short space of time, among whom would be many, if not a majority of those, especially from sh*thole countries, who do not fit the type you want. And it is very difficult to assimilate huge quantities of a type who come at the same time.

And he doesn't want, rightly so I think, chain migration. Do you?

Maybe he didn't say what is being reported, it wouldn't be the first time the media lied to make him look bad. Nor would it be beyond him to say something that vile.

You read racism into what he said. I suppose that is what makes it vile to you since you agree they came from, metaphorically, sh*thole countries. But he didn't specify or even mention race. You are a devout Catholic. Get back to your scholastic roots.

Immigration is not based entirely on charity.
https://www.wikihow.com/Immigrate-Into-the-United-States-Permanently

The history behind family based immigration and how immigration works is pretty interesting.
If you do some genealogy and find out about your ancestry you might find out that the places they came from are not so nice either. Nobody emigrates because there is too much opportunity.
You can find some basics on Wikepedia and move on from there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_laws_concerning_immigration_and_natural ization_in_the_United_States

You read racism into what he said. I suppose that is what makes it vile to you since you agree they came from, metaphorically, sh*thole countries. But he didn't specify or even mention race. You are a devout Catholic. Get back to your scholastic roots.
You've used this deke before but it really doesn't work.

You read racism into what he said. I suppose that is what makes it vile to you since you agree they came from, metaphorically, sh*thole countries. But he didn't specify or even mention race. You are a devout Catholic. Get back to your scholastic roots.

"You didn't qualify the word "empathy". So now you restrict it to not everyone we happen to feel sorry for"

I have empathy for everyone born into the 3rd world. That doesn't mean I think we should bring them all here. The ones we do bring, we do so, because of empathy and hope.

"You are not clear about what you suggest"

I apologize. I'll try to clarify. I suggest that if Trump truly doesn't know why it's noble to bring some people from horrible places here, then he is a bigger jerk than I thought. And I thought he was a pretty big jerk.

"Historically, from the inception of this country, immigration "policy" has been very selective "

That's exactly true. Until, what, the Kennedy years?

"there was no mention of "empathy" in it."

Oh. So if the word isn't explicitly stated on an immigration document, then immigration policy cannot be based on empathy? I thought it was kind of obvious.

"What he doesn't want is massive thousands (of any kind) immigrating here within a vey short space of time, among whom would be many, if not a majority of those, especially from sh*thole countries, who do not fit the type 'you want"

That's not what he said. If he said "I don't want immigrants who won't be good neighbors", no one would take issue with that. No one. That's not what he said.

People cannot control what country they are born into. I'm not a huge fan of attacking people for things they did not choose, and have zero control over.

"You read racism into what he said"

Possibly racist in my opinion. I don't have a history of screaming racism every time someone I disagree with opens his mouth. It takes something to get me to that point. To assume that people from Norway are automatically superior to people from Africa and Haiti, isn't something I like coming out of the mouth of my POTUS. If he runs against Hilary again in 2020, I will once again have his sign on my lawn. But I thought this statement was deeply offensive.

I'm not even saying I'm opposed to being more selective in immigration, to bring people who are more likely to thrive and more likely to embrace our culture, I have no problem with that. He just sounded like a eugenicist. Let the liberals worship Margaret Sanger, I don't want that filth where I breathe.

You've used this deke before but it really doesn't work.

It was a fact, not deke.

I'll start off with my belief that of course we Norske are superior to everyone.
Now that I have that out of the way, I'll move on to the history of family entitlements. As i understand it in the 60s when the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 was passed the ability to have your relatives follow you was added. At that time it was thought that would help mostly Europeans. Surprise it didn't work like that.

I wonder if some of that Clinton Foundation $ found its way to Haiti as it was supposed to if the place would less of a shiithole 👀
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It was a fact, not deke.
People mix prejudice and racism all the time. To claim something isn't racism because you didn't explicitly mention the race is a distraction from the root issue...it's a deke.

People mix prejudice and racism all the time. To claim something isn't racism because you didn't explicitly mention the race is a distraction from the root issue...it's a deke.

Too accuse someone of racism without factual evidence of it is the root method of the type of vague and prejudicial verbiage that you so often practice.

"You didn't qualify the word "empathy". So now you restrict it to not everyone we happen to feel sorry for"

I have empathy for everyone born into the 3rd world. That doesn't mean I think we should bring them all here. The ones we do bring, we do so, because of empathy and hope.

Empathy is a fine thing. Most of us empathize. But it cannot be a rational purpose for an immigration policy.

"You are not clear about what you suggest"

I apologize. I'll try to clarify. I suggest that if Trump truly doesn't know why it's noble to bring some people from horrible places here, then he is a bigger jerk than I thought. And I thought he was a pretty big jerk.

Where do you get that he doesn't know why it's noble? And is being noble another purpose besides empathy for an immigration policy?

"Historically, from the inception of this country, immigration "policy" has been very selective "

That's exactly true. Until, what, the Kennedy years?

Immigration and Nationality act of 1965--"It created a seven-category preference system, which gave priority to relatives of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents and to professionals and other individuals with specialized skills." Still selective. And not based on empathy or nobility.

"there was no mention of "empathy" in it."

Oh. So if the word isn't explicitly stated on an immigration document, then immigration policy cannot be based on empathy? I thought it was kind of obvious.

The change in the 1965 immigration policy was to eliminate the preference for European immigrants, and to create a more "multicultural" society. It was not based on empathy or nobility. The immigration "problem" created by that change arose when amnesty was given to the millions of illegal "immigrants" here which not only brought about an unanticipated (by "Conservatives--maybe "liberals" did anticipate it) huge shift in demographics, especially when it was enhanced with chain migration. If you empathize with chain migration and think it is a noble thing, you're welcome to your opinion. I don't agree with such an opinion.

"What he doesn't want is massive thousands (of any kind) immigrating here within a vey short space of time, among whom would be many, if not a majority of those, especially from sh*thole countries, who do not fit the type 'you want"

That's not what he said. If he said "I don't want immigrants who won't be good neighbors", no one would take issue with that. No one. That's not what he said.

Nor did he say anything about race. He has said, at other times, similar things about immigration which you espouse.

People cannot control what country they are born into. I'm not a huge fan of attacking people for things they did not choose, and have zero control over.

When did he "attack" some because of the country they were born in?

"You read racism into what he said"

Possibly racist in my opinion. I don't have a history of screaming racism every time someone I disagree with opens his mouth. It takes something to get me to that point. To assume that people from Norway are automatically superior to people from Africa and Haiti, isn't something I like coming out of the mouth of my POTUS. If he runs against Hilary again in 2020, I will once again have his sign on my lawn. But I thought this statement was deeply offensive.

Was he referring to "whites" or to a compatible culture peopled by those who are far more likely to have the skill sets and attitudes that fit our needs then those raised in a sh*thole?

I'm not even saying I'm opposed to being more selective in immigration, to bring people who are more likely to thrive and more likely to embrace our culture, I have no problem with that. He just sounded like a eugenicist. Let the liberals worship Margaret Sanger, I don't want that filth where I breathe.

From what he has said about immigration at other times, it sounds that you and he are more in agreement than disagreement. You may be giving him more credit than he deserves for being scientifically inclined. I think business, not eugenics, is his wheelhouse and point of view. He certainly has not said he believed in eugenics.

I wonder if some of that Clinton Foundation $ found its way to Haiti as it was supposed to if the place would less of a shiithole ��
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I read today today that a total of 6 homes were built with funds from the Clinton Foundation, cost was a little less than was spent on Chelsea's wedding

I read today today that a total of 6 homes were built with funds from the Clinton Foundation, cost was a little less than was spent on Chelsea's wedding



You ask me this website has become a ShiitHole ever since this political forum was added.
Not a day goes by there’s no political post & replies and nothing about fishing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You ask me this website has become a ShiitHole ever since this political forum was added.
Not a day goes by there’s no political post & replies and nothing about fishing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well there is that one thread in the Ice Fishing section that has been ok. Seen a few good pictures of bass and some big trout on there. And I enjoy seeing some of those beautiful flies that SaltyDog posts.

Sometimes this political forum reminds me to much of the comment sections on all the online news sites. The fish don't care who you voted for. I would bet that more than a few fishing friendships or possible friendships have been soured or prevented by this forum alone.

From what he has said about immigration at other times, it sounds that you and he are more in agreement than disagreement. You may be giving him more credit than he deserves for being scientifically inclined. I think business, not eugenics, is his wheelhouse and point of view. He certainly has not said he believed in eugenics.

"Empathy is a fine thing. Most of us empathize. But it cannot be a rational purpose for an immigration policy."

The Battle Hymn Of The Republic says, I think, "as He died to make men holy, let us die to set them free". If empathy for people is a valid reason to go to war, surely it's enough of a reason to let some people come here.

"Where do you get that he doesn't know why it's noble? "

He asked why we are bringing in people from these countries? That tells me, he doesn't currently know why we would want to do it.

"If you empathize with chain migration and think it is a noble thing, you're welcome to your opinion. I don't agree with such an opinion."

I think I agree with you on that one. Being related to someone who is here, isn't a good enough reason, in and of itself.

"it sounds that you and he are more in agreement than disagreement"

I would bet you are probably right. I agree with most of his policy agenda. It's just that his choice of wording, is so unnecessarily offensive. Who would deny that Haiti is a sh*thole country?

I agree that these are sh*thole countries. They are beyond dysfunctional, horribly run, and causing immeasurable despair. But that's exactly why I want to bring some people from those places. People in Norway aren't tortured to death for speaking against the government, they don't need our help.

"You may be giving him more credit than he deserves for being scientifically inclined"

You re probably right on that score, as well.

The other aspect of this that angers me, is about domestic politics. Because of the economy, and because of which senators are up for re-election in November, what the democrats should be talking about, is whether or not the GOP will win unanimously in November. But because of this guy's inability to keep from saying godawful things, if the elections were today, the democrats would probably re-take the house. I don't want that nutjob Pelosi as speaker of the House again, and Trump is making that more likely, and I just can't stand it.

I read today today that a total of 6 homes were built with funds from the Clinton Foundation, cost was a little less than was spent on Chelsea's wedding

Oh good lord.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You ask me this website has become a ShiitHole ever since this political forum was added.
Not a day goes by there’s no political post & replies and nothing about fishing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Agreed. I come here to check for new posts. See none other than this forum. Go over to other site for stuff to read about fishing or the tavern...

I always find it odd, how it's always someone says they heard or a he said she said crap. I work in the government and every meeting there is someone taking notes or recording the meeting for others to view later. It's just weird to have no record of what was actually said or not.

And besides the point, who cares if he said, shiithole countries. Trump is a capitalist and isnt thinking like a racist, he is purely thinking it is economically smarter to be more careful where we accept the most immigrants from. I have not been to Haiti, but I have been to Peru, Ecuador, Shri Lanka, Papua New Guinea, Malaysia, Philippines, and Indonesia to name a few of the countries that I would call shiithole countries. Many of the people there are great, friendly and hard working, but their government policies and economic hardships make them shiithole countries. I believe that it wouldnt be a bad idea to accept immigrants from all or most all countries, with them all having similar limits on how many. If we have a limit of 500 from Sweden then Mexico should have the same 500 with the same requirements for employability and such. Shiithole countries are not necessarily filled with shiiity people. If we accept them then we should ensure they have the ability to succeed and not just let them all in. By limiting them and making certain requirements we help both them and America.

What really happened...

"Empathy is a fine thing. Most of us empathize. But it cannot be a rational purpose for an immigration policy."

The Battle Hymn Of The Republic says, I think, "as He died to make men holy, let us die to set them free". If empathy for people is a valid reason to go to war, surely it's enough of a reason to let some people come here.

Jim, Jim, Jim . . . you're a Christian . . . put a little religion in a religious battle hymn. Making men holy is not about empathy or being noble. Verses like "He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath [not empathy] are stored . . . they have builded Him an altar in the evening dews and damps; I can read His righteous sentence by the dim and flaring lamps . . . He is sifting out the hearts of men before His judgment seat; O be swift, my soul, to answer Him! Be jubilant my feet . . . with a glory in His bosom that transfigures you and me; as He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free, while God is marching on" are not about being empathetic or noble. They are about doing what is righteous in the eyes of God. "Wrath. . . altar . . . judgment," and a soul answering to Him (God), transfiguring us so as to make us capable and righteous and God fearing and God loving enough to die to make men free from the sin of slavery are about Christian duty not about empathy or nobility.

Great song BTW. It was supposed to have inspired the Northern troops. But not because of empathy for the slaves.



"Where do you get that he doesn't know why it's noble? "

He asked why we are bringing in people from these countries? That tells me, he doesn't currently know why we would want to do it.

It sounds more like a rhetorical "why" rather than an inquisitive one.

"If you empathize with chain migration and think it is a noble thing, you're welcome to your opinion. I don't agree with such an opinion."

I think I agree with you on that one. Being related to someone who is here, isn't a good enough reason, in and of itself.

"it sounds that you and he are more in agreement than disagreement"

I would bet you are probably right. I agree with most of his policy agenda. It's just that his choice of wording, is so unnecessarily offensive. Who would deny that Haiti is a sh*thole country?

It's a sign of desperation when the left's attacks are reduced to Trump's choice of words.

I agree that these are sh*thole countries. They are beyond dysfunctional, horribly run, and causing immeasurable despair. But that's exactly why I want to bring some people from those places. People in Norway aren't tortured to death for speaking against the government, they don't need our help.

But the point of immigration is to help us, not to help Norway, or Haiti, or any country from whence immigrants come.

"You may be giving him more credit than he deserves for being scientifically inclined"

You re probably right on that score, as well.

The other aspect of this that angers me, is about domestic politics. Because of the economy, and because of which senators are up for re-election in November, what the democrats should be talking about, is whether or not the GOP will win unanimously in November. But because of this guy's inability to keep from saying godawful things, if the elections were today, the democrats would probably re-take the house. I don't want that nutjob Pelosi as speaker of the House again, and Trump is making that more likely, and I just can't stand it.

You may be right about that. The Dems and their media lackeys are latching on to anything they can find or manufacture in order to distract from Trump's significant achievements to this point. They have to hurry up and stop his cannonball express before it gathers enough steam to roll right over them.

Seems people have accepted the the POTUS should not be held to any standard.. of behavior or decency... Trump demands respect for himself and the Country and his office

But he does not give respect All Americans he shames the office and disrespects other Nations .. and his base rally around his Nationalism

You ask me this website has become a ShiitHole ever since this political forum was added.
Not a day goes by there’s no political post & replies and nothing about fishing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Say's the guy who seldom starts a thread in the fishing section during the year

at least in a political post you cant get accused of spot burning

Detbuch, if Trump had said "we can't take in untold millions of penniless immigrants. We need more people who are already self sufficient and who live in a culture more like ours". If he had said that, I wouldn't have a problem with it, because the unfortunate truth is that it's an accurate thing to say.

It's also OK to call Haiti a #^&#^&#^&#^&hole country, because that's exactly what it is. Violently oppressive, horribly corrupt, beyond dysfunctional. He didn't say, or even come close to implying, that all Haitians are #^&#^&#^&#^&ty people, yet of course that's exactly how the media is spinning it. I saw people on every channel last night talking about the wonderful Haitian people they know. That's absurd. He was talking about the way the country is run. And he is right.

A year in, he has to know that statement, will be painted as if he said "we need fewer blacks and more whites". Maybe that's what he meant. Maybe it's not close to what he meant. But the media is going to act as if that's exactly what he said, and that increases the likelihood that Nancy Pelosi becomes the speaker again. We can't have that.

Stormy Daniels LOL
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There also may be some question as to what Trump actually said. Trump is denying it, which is to be taken with a grain of salt.

#^&#^&#^&#^& Durbin claims he said it, which is also to be taken with a grain of salt.

Senator Tom Cotton (Republican who has been very critical of Trump in the past, graduate of Harvard and Harvard Law, Iraq combat veteran), claims he didn't hear Trump say sh*thole.

Who knows.

You ask me this website has become a ShiitHole ever since this political forum was added.
Not a day goes by there’s no political post & replies and nothing about fishing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


Not true but it's a free country still last time I checked so you can exaggerate, there were zero posts in this forum for 2 full days on the 7th and 8th. Don't believe me? go check yourself.
You think the site is a shiithole, try being more positive instead of negative. But nobody asked you. Don't read the stuff you don't like. simple, so be more positive Ronnie or at least try to be

Detbuch, if Trump had said "we can't take in untold millions of penniless immigrants. We need more people who are already self sufficient and who live in a culture more like ours". If he had said that, I wouldn't have a problem with it, because the unfortunate truth is that it's an accurate thing to say.

It's also OK to call Haiti a #^&#^&#^&#^&hole country, because that's exactly what it is. Violently oppressive, horribly corrupt, beyond dysfunctional. He didn't say, or even come close to implying, that all Haitians are #^&#^&#^&#^&ty people, yet of course that's exactly how the media is spinning it. I saw people on every channel last night talking about the wonderful Haitian people they know. That's absurd. He was talking about the way the country is run. And he is right.

A year in, he has to know that statement, will be painted as if he said "we need fewer blacks and more whites". Maybe that's what he meant. Maybe it's not close to what he meant. But the media is going to act as if that's exactly what he said, and that increases the likelihood that Nancy Pelosi becomes the speaker again. We can't have that.

Whatever he said or didn't say, it was not a public statement. It was in a closed door session. I don't believe that #^&#^&#^&#^& Durbin, or Nancy Pelosi, or Bill Clinton, Or Barack Obama always used polite language in such sessions. It is recorded that many past presidents had potty mouths when not speaking to the public. Even Trump's presidential opponent, HRC, has been accused of foul mouthed language behind the scenes. It didn't bother her base or the mainstream media that she did. With Trump, it's a different matter. When he does it, he is unfit to be President.

It may be that, just as other Presidents and politicians were not seriously harmed for overly salty language, it may not hurt Trump. Of course, re Trump, it must always be "racist," or one of the other pick your poison phobes.

Whatever he said or didn't say, it was not a public statement. It was in a closed door session. I don't believe that #^&#^&#^&#^& Durbin, or Nancy Pelosi, or Bill Clinton, Or Barack Obama always used polite language in such sessions. It is recorded that many past presidents had potty mouths when not speaking to the public. Even Trump's presidential opponent, HRC, has been accused of foul mouthed language behind the scenes. It didn't bother her base or the mainstream media that she did. With Trump, it's a different matter. When he does it, he is unfit to be President.

It may be that, just as other Presidents and politicians were not seriously harmed for overly salty language, it may not hurt Trump. Of course, re Trump, it must always be "racist," or one of the other pick your poison phobes.

"It didn't bother her base or the mainstream media that she did. With Trump, it's a different matter. When he does it, he is unfit to be President."

That's true. And it's unfair. And it's also the reality, and Trump needs to remember that and not play into their hands in a way that helps them. I love it when he beats the media at their own game of fighting dirty. But I don't like it when he makes it easier for them to csling mud.

"it may not hurt Trump."

But it may hurt some GOP candidates running in purple districts. I want to keep the majority in the house. Trump needs to act as if that's his top priority.

I got caught up in an emotional reaction to what I was told he said. Even if he said it, while I wouldn't advise him to use that language until after the midterms, it's probably not as godawful a thing to say as I initially reacted. Those are sh*thole countries, that cannot be denied. That is not a criticism of the innocent people who live there, it's a criticism of the tyrants who run those places.

Detbuch, there is a family that runs the local gas station/convenience store in my town, been there for 15 years. I go in there most Sundays to fill my tank and buy the paper. They were from Liberia, one of the worst countries that ever existed. Came with nothing.

Got a job running the gas station. When they first got there, every Sunday, I'd see the Mom, Dad, son, and daughter. Always working. The kids were not playing video games, they were either working or studying. I got to know these people fairly well. They could not believe there was a place where they could work in an air conditioned building with running water and a flush toilet, selling things to happy customers all day long. They usually work 7 days a week. They could not believe the schools their kids went to with computers, teachers specializing in different classes, band, choir, activities. They could not believe they lived in an apartment that was comfortable and had a TV. They could not believe there was a country that took them out of the hell they were in, and transported them here.

The kids are both out of medical school, doing their residency or internships together.

Th parents cannot believe their good fortune, at what their kids are doing, compared to what might have happened.

The dad also tells me when he watches the news and he hears reporters talking about what a horrible racist place the US is, he cannot believe they are talking about the country that did so much for his family. He also told me something I will never, ever forget. He said it's better for a poor black man to be born in Africa and then to come here, than it is to be born in a place like Chicago. Because people in Chicago for some reason, embrace a culture that doesn't lend itself to a productive life. Whereas he had nothing, so he didn't take anything for granted. He can't believe that there are people who don't take full advantage of the opportunities here. I will never forget what he said, and I think he's exactly correct. But to hear it from his, is more profound and moving, than it is to hear it from a politician.

We can't take in all the world's poor. But I wouldn't want to limit immigration to self-sufficient white people either. Obviously it hurts poor Americans to import millions of unskilled penniless immigrants willing to work for 5 cents a day. We need some balance.

But there's something so right, so glorious, so uniquely American, about what this family's story is. And every town in America has families like that. These people love this country deeply, and have little patience for those who say that only the rich can get ahead, that there is institutional racism, etc.

Does that make any sense? I'm not even sure what I'm saying, I'm babbling a bit. I need to go get some gas and see this family, which always cheers me up. Always.

Thank goodness that there were a series of social welfare programs and a liberal imigration policy that let this family in and get their start. ;)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Whatever he said or didn't say, it was not a public statement. It was in a closed door session.
Doesn't matter.

I don't believe that #^&#^&#^&#^& Durbin, or Nancy Pelosi, or Bill Clinton, Or Barack Obama always used polite language in such sessions. It is recorded that many past presidents had potty mouths when not speaking to the public. Even Trump's presidential opponent, HRC, has been accused of foul mouthed language behind the scenes. It didn't bother her base or the mainstream media that she did. With Trump, it's a different matter. When he does it, he is unfit to be President
This has nothing to do with foul language.

Any person who thinks Haiti is not a crap hole has not been there. If he said it I am not exactly shocked.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thank goodness that there were a series of social welfare programs and a liberal imigration policy that let this family in and get their start. ;)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Liberal programs brought him in - maybe. Once here, the nuclear family stayed very close together, worked 80+ hours a week, he kept a close eye on his kids, they go to church, and his kids studied like crazy. You tell me, does that more resemble liberalism or conservatism.

One generation - ONE - and his kids graduated from medical school. That doesn't happen in a racist country where we only care about the top 1%. Liberals never stop claiming otherwise, because it's much easier for poor people to be told that they are poor because wealthy people stole from them, then it is to hear that they are poor because they chose not to work as hard, or make as good decision, as this family.

"It didn't bother her base or the mainstream media that she did. With Trump, it's a different matter. When he does it, he is unfit to be President."

That's true. And it's unfair. And it's also the reality, and Trump needs to remember that and not play into their hands in a way that helps them. I love it when he beats the media at their own game of fighting dirty. But I don't like it when he makes it easier for them to csling mud.

"it may not hurt Trump."

But it may hurt some GOP candidates running in purple districts. I want to keep the majority in the house. Trump needs to act as if that's his top priority

If the GOP candidates in purple states would quit acting purple instead of red, thus making it difficult for a Trump-like agenda to get passed, they might have a better chance to get re-elected than if Trump stopped being Trump.

I got caught up in an emotional reaction to what I was told he said. Even if he said it, while I wouldn't advise him to use that language until after the midterms, it's probably not as godawful a thing to say as I initially reacted. Those are sh*thole countries, that cannot be denied. That is not a criticism of the innocent people who live there, it's a criticism of the tyrants who run those places

The manufactured hullabaloo over what he supposedly said was exactly meant to get you and most everyone else caught up in an emotional reaction. It was not intended that you would recover and come to your senses so soon. It was meant that it would be another really shocking part of the continual pile on which will extend at least until the next election.


Detbuch, there is a family that runs the local gas station/convenience store in my town, been there for 15 years. I go in there most Sundays to fill my tank and buy the paper. They were from Liberia, one of the worst countries that ever existed. Came with nothing.

Got a job running the gas station. When they first got there, every Sunday, I'd see the Mom, Dad, son, and daughter. Always working. The kids were not playing video games, they were either working or studying. I got to know these people fairly well. They could not believe there was a place where they could work in an air conditioned building with running water and a flush toilet, selling things to happy customers all day long. They usually work 7 days a week. They could not believe the schools their kids went to with computers, teachers specializing in different classes, band, choir, activities. They could not believe they lived in an apartment that was comfortable and had a TV. They could not believe there was a country that took them out of the hell they were in, and transported them here.

The kids are both out of medical school, doing their residency or internships together.

Th parents cannot believe their good fortune, at what their kids are doing, compared to what might have happened.

The dad also tells me when he watches the news and he hears reporters talking about what a horrible racist place the US is, he cannot believe they are talking about the country that did so much for his family. He also told me something I will never, ever forget. He said it's better for a poor black man to be born in Africa and then to come here, than it is to be born in a place like Chicago. Because people in Chicago for some reason, embrace a culture that doesn't lend itself to a productive life. Whereas he had nothing, so he didn't take anything for granted. He can't believe that there are people who don't take full advantage of the opportunities here. I will never forget what he said, and I think he's exactly correct. But to hear it from his, is more profound and moving, than it is to hear it from a politician.

We can't take in all the world's poor. But I wouldn't want to limit immigration to self-sufficient white people either. Obviously it hurts poor Americans to import millions of unskilled penniless immigrants willing to work for 5 cents a day. We need some balance.

But there's something so right, so glorious, so uniquely American, about what this family's story is. And every town in America has families like that. These people love this country deeply, and have little patience for those who say that only the rich can get ahead, that there is institutional racism, etc.

Does that make any sense? I'm not even sure what I'm saying, I'm babbling a bit. I need to go get some gas and see this family, which always cheers me up. Always.

That's a wonderful story. As I said above, and a few times in other threads, I live in a community of Latinos most of whom emigrated here from Mexico. They have revived the neighborhood which was, as was much of Detroit, decaying in the care of unemployed and welfare dependent blacks, mostly, but likewise several remaining whites. Mexican Town which runs along the full length of Vernor Ave is thriving with small businesses and refurbished homes. So I know that story well--many times over. I also knew and worked with many blacks that emigrated from Jamaica and Nigeria. For the most part, they also did very well as far as education and employment. I also worked with more than a few Asians. They did extremely well, But, I also worked with and know many whites who came from Europe. And they too did and do very well.

So why do the immigrant spectrum of races do better than our abundant population of unproductive blacks and whites? Why do our homegrown "tired poor and huddled masses" so much remain that way? It's obviously, as our immigrants demonstrate, not because of race or poverty or discrimination. Why would your Liberian dad be correct when he says that "it's better for a poor black man to be born in Africa and then to come here, than it is to be born in a place like Chicago. Because people in Chicago for some reason, embrace a culture that doesn't lend itself to a productive life"? Why do those people in Chicago embrace an unproductive culture? I can't believe that the sheer number of our native poor and unproductive are merely at the mental bottom of the Bell Curve. There are too many for that to be the case.

If the Immigrants can do it, so should most of our home grown lackers. You and I, and "Conservatives" have been saying for a long time why they can't. But the intellectual, Progressive, elites, know better. We are the Yahoos. If it were left to us, the nation would be a backward bush country drenched in racism and redneck religion. Our retrograde notions of self reliance, individualism, personal responsibility, liberty, are all just a means of preserving the old status quo of white supremacy.

I got a rather disappointing insight a couple of decades ago into how the welfare state could plant its seeds of destruction. My wife tutored the kids of one of the Mexican families who we were very close with. Emilio and Yolanda came from Mexico and had an extended family here. They were all industrious, mostly self-employed in a beauty parlor and home handyman repair work. They wanted their kids to do better. So they asked my wife, a university English professor, to tutor them, especially in language and writing skills. Their daughter did well. Went to college and became a lawyer. I would rather her degree would have been in something more productive. But what really made my heart sink is that she became an advocate for social welfare justice for Latino families.

Apparently, what she learned in our educational system was that the way her parents did it was not the good mode. The good way was for the government to clear the path and assist along the way. And, more importantly, that the government should provide programs and services, family or otherwise, for those, the growing number of those, who needed "help," even permanent help because they would be held back by discrimination, etc., etc. I'm sure you know the drill.

So the first generation is happy to participate in "The American Dream." You know, that freedom and personal responsibility nonsense, etc. etc. And if they're successful enough, their kids can go to college and learn to be Social Justice Warriors, or social justice fellow travelers who help spread the word and educate the rest of us about what the good way is.

It is nice and heartwarming, even inspirational and affirmative of our belief in what used to be accepted as American values, to see the fleshed out stories similar to your Liberian family. And I hope, even wish, that their children and grandchildren will cherish their views on freedom and opportunity, on the American way, and not become creatures of the state.

But I prefer, rather than replacing with immigrants our failed millions who have had their integrity sucked out of them by the welfare state, that we replace immigration with our own dysfunctionals by forcing them to be functional. "Help" them emigrate from their government induced dystopian existence into the fulfilling existence of productive, responsible, independent humans, by giving them a sink or swim choice, just as the immigrants from foreign nations have had to choose.

If we don't do that, then we can look forward to massively adding to the number of dysfunctional unemployed as many of the children and grandchildren of the marvelous, productive, and grateful immigrants pass through our Progressive educational system, abandon their parents basic and humble ways, and become bitter, anti-American, Progressive SJW's or just add to the unemployment roles.

20 years active duty navy, stationed in Japan for 6 years, completed three 6 month deployments to the Gulf and three 6 month deployments to South America. I have been to just about every country in South America and Asia. We as a country cannot feed and help the world by bringing their people to America. Our resources are finite and in the end all you will do is make the US just as bad.

We need to stop giving "handouts" and start giving jobs and opportunity. Want to immigrate to the US, we should have a job site, where people can view jobs and locations, apply for the job, get hired, pass a back ground check and poof, now you are a legal immigrant that is helping the country and not hindering it.



We are the "Land of Opportunity", not "Lactation Nation" where we breast feed you from cradle to grave. Try to feed the world and you will end up very dried up and sagging to your knees.

Immigration should be connected with employment and opportunity and not based entirely on charity.


if you spent that much time in the navy you have seen the true face of immigration of those who stood next to you .. or did you treat them with the same arrogance and mis information you display here..

its a republican fantasy that immigration is based on charity ! thats the story it tell its base before they go to bed same with chain migration ... a lie

the current system is a republican design .. they had prayed that immigration was going to come from western europe and when they got here they would bring their families who were like them and all would be safe and white

but in the 70-and 80s the demographic change it was Africa and south Americans (brown people ) who came legally and brought their families under the system that republicans built..

Nigerians will 'never go back to their huts'
Haitians immigrants 'all have AIDS'
Lottery program sends us 'their worst'
Mexico is sending 'rapists' and 'drug dealers'

So feel free to keep defending this embarrassment

Any person who thinks Haiti is not a crap hole has not been there. If he said it I am not exactly shocked.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Haiti might not be the best place to visit, but the people who reported after the tragic quake said they were amazed with the character and strength of the people.

Enjoy your bed tonight.

Haiti might not be the best place to visit, but the people who reported after the tragic quake said they were amazed with the character and strength of the people.

Enjoy your bed tonight.

Such a people of great character and strength should be able to build a great nation. A great Haiti.

if you spent that much time in the navy you have seen the true face of immigration of those who stood next to you .. or did you treat them with the same arrogance and mis information you display here..

its a republican fantasy that immigration is based on charity ! thats the story it tell its base before they go to bed same with chain migration ... a lie

the current system is a republican design .. they had prayed that immigration was going to come from western europe and when they got here they would bring their families who were like them and all would be safe and white

but in the 70-and 80s the demographic change it was Africa and south Americans (brown people ) who came legally and brought their families under the system that republicans built..

Nigerians will 'never go back to their huts'
Haitians immigrants 'all have AIDS'
Lottery program sends us 'their worst'
Mexico is sending 'rapists' and 'drug dealers'

So feel free to keep defending this embarrassment

WOW! I am sorry I had no idea of the extent of your mental illness. If I offended you in any way please tell your Mommy that I am sorry that she raised a very "special" little boy/girl....

You didnt read a word I said or put even an ounce of thought into your reply, it's just utter nonsense...

When I used to give blood, they would ask if I had ever been to Haiti. If I answered yes, the Red Cross didn’t want my blood. If that’s not a sh*thole, is really hate to see what is.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Haiti might not be the best place to visit, but the people who reported after the tragic quake said they were amazed with the character and strength of the people.

Enjoy your bed tonight.

Jeff, you telling me to enjoy my bed is just plain creepy. You are a sick #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&. FYI, my uber driver in Miami was Haitian,great guy but I really couldn't understand him. He was a happy sort nonetheless.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

When I used to give blood, they would ask if I had ever been to Haiti. If I answered yes, the Red Cross didn’t want my blood. If that’s not a sh*thole, is really hate to see what is.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


Isn’t it true in Califoria they are fighting for the rights of people with AIDS to donate blood because they are being “discriminated”
Red Cross must be a bunch a racist !
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Haiti might not be the best place to visit, but the people who reported after the tragic quake said they were amazed with the character and strength of the people.

Enjoy your bed tonight.

Trump never said or implied that Haitian people were of poor character. He was being critical of the government. The people who run that country deserve to be lined up against a wall. Apunten...fuego!

WOW! I am sorry I had no idea of the extent of your mental illness. ...

It's called liberalism. A tragic affliction that I wouldn't wish on anyone.

Isn’t it true in Califoria they are fighting for the rights of people with AIDS to donate blood because they are being “discriminated”
Red Cross must be a bunch a racist !
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

When it's safer to let patients risk bleeding to death, than it is to give them my blood if I visited Haiti, that means it's a sh*thole.

Haiti might not be the best place to visit, .

Yeah, that's not intentionally watered-down or anything. Spence, if Obama said Haiti was the nicest place on Earth, would you reflexively sell your house and move there? Is party politics literally all that matters to you? You can't just say "Haiti is a horrible Godforsaken place", just because Trump said the same thing? He can't be correct if he said Haiti s*cks? You can't give him that? You're that close-minded?

Say what you want,the country shares the same soil and water as a vacation destination. One small difference is Haiti remains a crap hole and the other half is civilized enough to understand tourism. Don't blame the people,blame the government.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

WOW! I am sorry I had no idea of the extent of your mental illness. If I offended you in any way please tell your Mommy that I am sorry that she raised a very "special" little boy/girl....

You didnt read a word I said or put even an ounce of thought into your reply, it's just utter nonsense...

your very clear on you stance .. and how you feel about immigrants.. the only mental illness is your reasoning when it comes to immigration and how it works...

Even with all these immigrants from these #^&#^&#^&#^& hole country's and all the bad they bring (according to republicans) unemployment is at an all time low the markets up ... and republicans still want to blame immigration and keep the Base happy ( they are all still here and the sky hasn't fallen)

your very clear on you stance .. and how you feel about immigrants.. the only mental illness is your reasoning when it comes to immigration and how it works...

Even with all these immigrants from these #^&#^&#^&#^& hole country's and all the bad they bring (according to republicans) unemployment is at an all time low the markets up ... and republicans still want to blame immigration and keep the Base happy all still here and the sky hasn't fallen)

One thing that I sincerely admire about liberals, is that they want those at the bottom to get ahead. Liberals like to bemoan that those at the bottom, don't see rising wages. Part of the reason why, is that between legel/illegal immigration, we have millions of penniless, unskilled workers, willing to work for next to nothing.

WDMSO, when you increase the supply of something, do you know what happens to the value of that something? It decreases. It is beyond dispute, that immigration has limited the ability of poor Americans to earn more.

That is a fact. And it's worth considering, when detailing immigration policy. We can't act like there's no downside.

Jeff, you telling me to enjoy my bed is just plain creepy. You are a sick #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&. FYI, my uber driver in Miami was Haitian,great guy but I really couldn't understand him. He was a happy sort nonetheless.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Hahahahahaha...#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&. Classy there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Isn’t it true in Califoria they are fighting for the rights of people with AIDS to donate blood because they are being “discriminated”
Red Cross must be a bunch a racist !
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Ummmm...no.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It is beyond dispute, that immigration has limited the ability of poor Americans to earn more.
This is up there with the most absurd things ever said in this forum.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

https://www.npr.org/2018/01/13/577808792/president-trumps-idea-of-good-and-bad-immigrant-countries-has-a-historical-prece

Interesting read

One thing that I sincerely admire about liberals, is that they want those at the bottom to get ahead. Liberals like to bemoan that those at the bottom, don't see rising wages. Part of the reason why, is that between legel/illegal immigration, we have millions of penniless, unskilled workers, willing to work for next to nothing.

WDMSO, when you increase the supply of something, do you know what happens to the value of that something? It decreases. It is beyond dispute, that immigration has limited the ability of poor Americans to earn more.

That is a fact. And it's worth considering, when detailing immigration policy. We can't act like there's no downside.

Immigration arguments like yours is like saying don't pee in the ocean it will turn it yellow ...
Immigration has no effect on poor American to earn more . But keep thinking that's why poor Americans are poor .... because of immigrants .. you nailed it

This would be a good time to hear again how minorities vote overwhelmingly for Democrats because of welfare and not because of what Republican say and think about them.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

When I used to give blood, they would ask if I had ever been to Haiti. If I answered yes, the Red Cross didn’t want my blood. If that’s not a sh*thole, is really hate to see what is.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


Funny - the bride and I lived in Germany for three years and we are not allowed to give blood either.

Lots of places have sh1tholes, some totally are sh!tholes, still not proper for the Pres to declare it the way he did. And minor surprise for people jumping on his sheit about it.. Don't let a good opportunity go to waste.

Simply there are good and bad people in all places, good or sheithole.

Funny - the bride and I lived in Germany for three years and we are not allowed to give blood either.

Lots of places have sh1tholes, some totally are sh!tholes, still not proper for the Pres to declare it the way he did. And minor surprise for people jumping on his sheit about it.. Don't let a good opportunity go to waste.

Simply there are good and bad people in all places, good or sheithole.

Still not proper for the Pres to declare it the way he did
:btu: that's all ways been the issue . Another example he creates his own issues with the press like this guy

http://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-42462190/fake-news-blunder-from-us-envoy-to-the-netherlands

No it’s not proper.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

A rose by any other name is still a rose
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Immigration arguments like yours is like saying don't pee in the ocean it will turn it yellow ...
Immigration has no effect on poor American to earn more . But keep thinking that's why poor Americans are poor .... because of immigrants .. you nailed it

Once again, a liberal responds to something I never even came close to saying. I didn’t say immigration causes poverty. But it doesn’t help. Maybe if you worked in the private sector for three seconds, or if you ever bothered to learn about economics, you’d understand. If you have a poor American making 10/hr, and you have a lot of immigrants willing to work for less, it makes it harder for him to get more. Not everyone is in a union where you get raises automatically, most of us have to command raises. It’s harder to do that with unskilled immigrants.

No sane person denies that. You deny it because you don’t happen to like it. Supply and demand exists whether your Bolshevik view likes it or not. I don’t like it either. But I know it exists.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Lots of places have sh1tholes, some totally are sh!tholes, still not proper for the Pres to declare it the way he did.

I'm not sure how saying this in a closed meeting with a handful of Senators is the same as "declaring" something to the world. I am sure every president we have ever had has said something similar to this, but it never made the news, but, since Trump has a CNN news crew living in his colon, every single time he passes gas, it makes the news.

Ummmm...no.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device



I guess Howie Carr must be part of fake news.
It was a topic on his radio show a few weeks back.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

This is up there with the most absurd things ever said in this forum.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

OK, comrade, tell me what's wrong with this logic.

There are Americans with very low skills.

Most of them make low wages.

We would like them to be able to command higher wages.

When we bring in millions of unskilled immigrants, that's more competition, for the same number of low-skill jobs. When you increase supply of something without a proportional increase in demand for that something, the price for that something (in this case, the wages of low-skill workers) will decrease.

Furthermore, the illegals among the unskilled laborers, are willing to work for less than minimum wage. This drives down the market value of unskilled labor. Which , obviously, makes it harder for unskilled workers to command a higher wage in the free market. If there were fewer unskilled workers, those that remain, could demand a higher wage. Because of decreased supply.

Supply and demand, Spence...supply and demand. You never read page one of a college economics or finance text?



Instead of just saying "that's absurd", enlighten me. Educate me. Tell me where my logic is flawed.

Hahahahahaha...#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&. Classy there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Foot, meet shoe.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

OK, comrade, tell me what's wrong with this logic.

There are Americans with very low skills.

Most of them make low wages.

We would like them to be able to command higher wages.

When we bring in millions of unskilled immigrants, that's more competition, for the same number of low-skill jobs. When you increase supply of something without a proportional increase in demand for that something, the price for that something (in this case, the wages of low-skill workers) will decrease.

Furthermore, the illegals among the unskilled laborers, are willing to work for less than minimum wage. This drives down the market value of unskilled labor. Which , obviously, makes it harder for unskilled workers to command a higher wage in the free market. If there were fewer unskilled workers, those that remain, could demand a higher wage. Because of decreased supply.

Supply and demand, Spence...supply and demand. You never read page one of a college economics or finance text?



Instead of just saying "that's absurd", enlighten me. Educate me. Tell me where my logic is flawed.

Be careful, you're making sense and some lefty is going to pop up and call you an arrogant racist... LOL

Be careful, you're making sense and some lefty is going to pop up and call you an arrogant racist... LOL

He’s not arrogant.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Immigration has no effect on poor American to earn more .

You are saying that when there is an influx of a cheap supply of something (in this case, unskilled labor), that doesn't suppress the price of that something.

If you made $10 /hour cleaning toilets, and you went to your boss asking for a raise. And your boss knows there are immigrants willing to clean his toilets for less. Does that not reduce your chances of getting a raise?

Be careful, you're making sense and some lefty is going to pop up and call you an arrogant racist... LOL

That's when I know that I've won the debate.

He’s not arrogant.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You're right, but I'm WAY more arrogant than I am racist...

This would be a good time to hear again how minorities vote overwhelmingly for Democrats because of welfare and not because of what Republican say and think about them.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What did George Bush, John McCain, and Mitt Romney say that was mean about minorities? They said derogatory things about minorities, and that's why they didn't do well with minorities? That's an interesting take on history.

It's also worth noting that multiple senators who were in that room, are denying that Trump said sh*thole.

It's also worth noting that multiple senators who were in that room, are denying that Trump said sh*thole.

Because they are soo honest. Believe me...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Because they are soo honest. Believe me...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Are they any less honest than the ones saying he said it?

It's weird it's not on tape or on official notes taken during the meeting.

Even if they produced video of it now of him not saying it, the media has already gotten what they wanted out of it.

I wonder if JFK ever referred to Cuba as a sh!thole.... Perhaps he would have phrased it more like "Those dirt eating Commie sons a beeches"

It's also worth noting that multiple senators who were in that room, are denying that Trump said sh*thole.

Name one.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Because they are soo honest. Believe me...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Why are the ones who claimed he said it, more credible? Tom cotton is a republican, yes, but he’s not an attack dog, he’s not a jerk, he’s not known as a party hack like Harry Reid would be considered. Trump may well have said it, it’s not beyond him. But we don’t know. What we do know is that many on the left are deranged with a fixation to demonize him. This may be an example of they. Or maybe he said it and his defenders are lying. We don’t know.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Name one.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Tom cotton. Cum Laude graduate of Harvard law school and an army combat veteran. Not yet known to be a party hack.

Now, I answered your question, yes? Would you extend me the same courtesy? Please tell me why my comments were absurd, when I claimed that a huge increase in the supply of unskilled labor, especially illegals who will work for less than minimum wage, keeps wages suppressed for Americans who are low skilled and competing for the same jobs.

If you spent less time reading Chairman Mao’s Little Red Book, and a bit more time reading Economics 101, you’d know that the basic principles of supply and demand, suggest I am correct.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Cotton first said he didn't recall. Hell even Lindsey Graham verified the remarks.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Cotton first said he didn't recall. Hell even Lindsey Graham verified the remarks.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Senator Perdue also says Trump didn't use the word sh*thole.

Are you going to comment at all, about why my beliefs about immigration keeping low wage earners down, is one of the more absurd things ever posted here? You really deny that if you increase the supply of something (ESPECIALLY if the new supply comes at a lower cost), then it's pretty hard to raise the price of that something? You work in Finance, and you deny that?

Trump told a reporter yesterday he is the least racist person they would ever possibly interview, is anyone buying that one:rotf3::rotf3::rotf3:?

The GOP for whatever reason have become lapdogs cowering at the feet of Trump, so it doesn't surprise me at all those in attendance either denied hearing it or said they didn't recall hearing it. I suspect they knew exactly what the fallout would be and I'm sure wanted to try to lesson the impact, especially with a budget deadline quickly approaching. I don't doubt he said it, that's exactly who Trump is, he is vulgar, abrasive, insensitive and incapable of thinking twice about anything he says.

OK, comrade, tell me what's wrong with this logic.

There are Americans with very low skills.

Most of them make low wages.

We would like them to be able to command higher wages.

When we bring in millions of unskilled immigrants, that's more competition, for the same number of low-skill jobs. When you increase supply of something without a proportional increase in demand for that something, the price for that something (in this case, the wages of low-skill workers) will decrease.

Furthermore, the illegals among the unskilled laborers, are willing to work for less than minimum wage. This drives down the market value of unskilled labor. Which , obviously, makes it harder for unskilled workers to command a higher wage in the free market. If there were fewer unskilled workers, those that remain, could demand a higher wage. Because of decreased supply.

Supply and demand, Spence...supply and demand. You never read page one of a college economics or finance text?



Instead of just saying "that's absurd", enlighten me. Educate me. Tell me where my logic is flawed.


Past 8 years there have been on avg 11.3 million illigal immagrants. (NOT LEGAL) in the USA

45mil americans or 14% of all Americans live below the poverty line

These facts clearly go against your statement

And seems you need to explain what unskilled jobs they are depressing. that poor Americans are upset that they cant obtain

Picking Strawberry's, avacados farm hands landscaping

So 11.5 million poor immigrant are making a living off depressed wages that they are depressing yet paying bills and spending money ..and at the same time taking jobs from 45 million poor Americans who you suggest want those jobs ..
In a country of 323 million .. your math isn't adding up

Jim, anybody with any sense of honesty will admit that Republicans all believe the minorities are lazy and enjoy sitting around taking welfare. Welfare is like it dog whistle to Republicans. You yourself have claimed numerous times that welfare is all a grand Democratic scheme to keep minorities down by making them dependent on it and that us why they vote for Democrats.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Cotton first said he didn't recall. Hell even Lindsey Graham verified the remarks.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Cotton and Purdue both claimed they couldn't recall it at first.
Then they magically remembered what Trump said. Now in my best Jim voice this goes to show how sleazy and disgusting the conservatives are, their honesty means nothing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Still not proper for the Pres to declare it the way he did
:btu: that's all ways been the issue . Another example he creates his own issues with the press like this guy

http://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-42462190/fake-news-blunder-from-us-envoy-to-the-netherlands

Ref A - Nobody is talking about the Wold Book or Bannon. Trump has a little bit of a Jedi Mind Trick.

I'm not sure how saying this in a closed meeting with a handful of Senators is the same as "declaring" something to the world. I am sure every president we have ever had has said something similar to this, but it never made the news, but, since Trump has a CNN news crew living in his colon, every single time he passes gas, it makes the news.

Here is the rub. What he says behind closed doors shouldn't be fodder for everything but you have to assume it will be. Maybe he'll have more flexibility after the election... Trump's problem ('cept as when redirecting the lemmings - see Ref A above) is he scores own goals on himself too much increasing the fire he's under, which added to the normal unfair coverage a Rep pres will get from a biased D Media, which fuels the apoplectic left and social media. Volume goes to eleventy.

OK, comrade, tell me what's wrong with this logic.

There are Americans with very low skills.

Most of them make low wages.

We would like them to be able to command higher wages.

When we bring in millions of unskilled immigrants, that's more competition, for the same number of low-skill jobs. When you increase supply of something without a proportional increase in demand for that something, the price for that something (in this case, the wages of low-skill workers) will decrease.

Furthermore, the illegals among the unskilled laborers, are willing to work for less than minimum wage. This drives down the market value of unskilled labor. Which , obviously, makes it harder for unskilled workers to command a higher wage in the free market. If there were fewer unskilled workers, those that remain, could demand a higher wage. Because of decreased supply.

Supply and demand, Spence...supply and demand. You never read page one of a college economics or finance text?



Instead of just saying "that's absurd", enlighten me. Educate me. Tell me where my logic is flawed.

Jim - why are so few people willing to recognize this?

Jim - why are so few people willing to recognize this?

Not sure what you mean? Are you giving me a subtle hint that if so many people disagree, I must be wrong? Or are you sincerely wondering why so many people disagree?

If it's the former, I hope you know I have zero issue with you disagreeing with me. None whatsoever. But I think the most basic principles of supply and demand suggest I am correct.

If it's the latter, I think people either (1) are liberal ideologues and cannot admit anything that doesn't support liberalism, even if it's obvious truth. Spence is in this category. Or (2) people can't stomach saying it out loud, because it is a harsh reality, which means that we must put strict limits on the number of poor people we let come here. For many people, it's not an easy thing to say 'no' to someone that might desperately want to come here, it might be their only shot at having a comfortable life? It's not easy to slam the door in people's faces. But life ain't always easy. I don't like that more than anybody, I want everybody to be rich and comfortable.

Rand Paul hates Donald Trump. But he was on with Chuck Todd this weekend, explaining how much money Trump gave (before he entered politics) to support humanitarian missions to Haiti, medical mercy missions that Rand Paul, a doctor, was aware of. Trump was a major, major donor to these missions. If all he cared about was his net worth, and if he doesn't like Haitians, why would he do this? Answer...he wouldn't.

I do not think Trump is a super nice guy. I wouldn't want him dating my Mom. He says things that are hard to believe a grown man could say, probably because he's not a grown man in many ways, he's a big spoiled bratty baby in many ways. But he's not Hitler or Darth Vader or Mr Burns from 'The Simpsons' either. There are many stories of his generosity out there (as there should be with any billionaire). All of that gets lost because (1) he has a penchant for saying the most crass things you can imagine, which naturally grab our attention, and (2) 99% of the media is on a mission to demonize him.

He will never, ever get a fair shake in the media. And by 'fair', I don't mean zero negative coverage. I mean negative coverage when he deserves it (not a rare thing), and positive coverage when he deserves it (also not a rare thing, especially if you think a healthy economy is good for Americans). He will never, ever get that, the left and the media are not capable of it. They literally are not capable of it. They could not be fair to Bush, or McCain, or Romney. And their hatred of those men was nothing compared to Trump, because those men were courteous to the media. Trump throws cheap shots right back at them, and is calling them out for exactly what they are. It never occurred to them that they might be held accountable for their yellow journalism, and they don't like it one bit.

I saw a poll that says 32% of Americans approve of Trumps handling of race relationships. Isn't that about his favorability rating? I would guess it's all Republicans right?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim - why are so few people willing to recognize this?

Maybe there's another reason. If liberals know this to be true deep down, there's a political advantage to denying it. If they let the Republicans say it, the Democrats can then say "did you hear what he said! He doesn't care about poor people in other countries, he doesn't want them here, so he's probably racist too. I am morally superior, so vote for me!". It works.

Here in CT, we have MASSIVE problems with unfunded pensions. The Democrats won't touch it. So when Republican says "this is not a tenable situation", the Democrats can pounce on him and say "aha! Did you hear that! He wants to steal your pensions, and give the money to his buddies who manage hedge funds! Vote for me, because I think they deserve the pensions they were promised!!" Yet they never, ever say how they will fund them.

I think there's a lot of that from the left. It's dishonest and destructive, almost to the point of calling it diabolical.

I saw a poll that says 32% of Americans approve of Trumps handling of race relationships. Isn't that about his favorability rating? I would guess it's all Republicans right?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You're probably right. That's why the liberals conspire with the media to demonize everyone who disagrees with them about anything. Because it works.

Black unemployment has never been as low as it is now. If Obama were still POTUS, they'd give him another Nobel Peace Prize for that. With Trump, the media won't discuss it. So they focus on something vulgar he might have said about Haiti, wherein he implied that it's a horribly run country. Imagine thinking that?

You're probably right. That's why the liberals conspire with the media to demonize everyone who disagrees with them about anything. Because it works?

Damn that media for making conservatives looks racist when they point out thier racist comments.

And it's not that he "might" of said what he said, it is that he actually said it . You had two senators who confirmed it and two Republican Senators who now have lied about what he said. So let's not say he might have said it when the facts all point to him actually saying it. And frankly I don't think he cares because if he did care he would be tweeting more about it in denying it. He's not doing that because he's blowing his little dog whistle.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim, anybody with any sense of honesty will admit that Republicans all believe the minorities are lazy and enjoy sitting around taking welfare. Welfare is like it dog whistle to Republicans. You yourself have claimed numerous times that welfare is all a grand Democratic scheme to keep minorities down by making them dependent on it and that us why they vote for Democrats.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"anybody with any sense of honesty will admit that Republicans all believe the minorities are lazy and enjoy sitting around taking welfare"

Bullsh*t. That's what the media wants you to believe about how the GOP thinks about minorities. What the GOP actually believes, is this - that some people truly cannot fend for themselves, and we need to help those people (evidenced by the fact that conservatives give slightly more to charity than liberals, we have discussed this). But it's better to help people to help themselves, than it is to create more people who cannot fend for themselves. Welfare can have a negative effect if it creates more people who can never go out and take care of themselves.

The late great liberal democrat senator from NY, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, said 50 years ago that liberal welfare was going to be an absolute Holocaust for blacks. He was excoriated for saying that. And he was 100% correct.

"You yourself have claimed numerous times that welfare is all a grand Democratic scheme to keep minorities down by making them dependent on it and that us why they vote for Democrats."

I believe that to my core, at least as regards to some liberals at the national level who make policy. I also believe that's why many liberal politicians want open borders and more immigration - it leads to more future democrat voters. That's the desired outcome.

How can any sane person be against secure borders? They can't. But they put their sanity aside, for political capital.

Paul, when I see what 50 years of liberalism has done for minorities in Hartford and Bridgeport, I say "these people deserve better". When liberals see what their policies have done there, they say "these people deserve more of the same". Because they aren't proposing anything different.

You tell me, Paul, which conclusion implies greater concern for poor minorities? Mine or theirs? Which one?

Liberalism has been a complete disaster for struggling blacks. Economically, culturally, in terms of family stability...it's been a catastrophe.

And when I say they deserve better than what liberals delivered, you claim that means I don't like them? Suffice to say, I see zero logic there. Just more blind political demonization in spite of the facts and common sense.

Finally, here's the last way I will reject your theory that the GOP doesn't care about poor minorities. The tax reform bill is going to help many minorities increase their net take home pay. You tell me, Paul...if Democrats care so much about minorities, what did they do under Obama, that was better for minorities, than this?

Damn that media for making conservatives looks racist when they point out thier racist comments.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I have no problem with calling out true racists. My issue is, liberals don't stop there. Obama said McCain was a racist. Hilary said half the American people are racist. Everyone to the right of Bernie Sanders is somehow a racist.

I have zero issue with accurate criticism. Stop pretending otherwise. I started this thread, and I was attacking Trump. I don't believe it's racist to say that Haiti is a sh*thole (especially when the person who said it has given large amounts of money to help Haiti),. I also don't think it's necessarily racist to say we need more immigrants who are (1) self sufficient, and (2) more likely to be able to assimilate into our culture. There's logic there. And it will always be painted as racist by your side. Always.

Past 8 years there have been on avg 11.3 million illigal immagrants. (NOT LEGAL) in the USA

45mil americans or 14% of all Americans live below the poverty line

These facts clearly go against your statement



Those 45 million americans are competing with many immigrants (legal and illegal) for the finite number of low skill jobs out there.

Increased competition, leads to lower price. I can't say it any simpler than that.

Wages at the bottom are not keeping up with inflation. So the math is indeed backing me up. So is common sense.

Damn that media for making conservatives looks racist when they point out thier racist comments.

And it's not that he "might" of said what he said, it is that he actually said it . You had two senators who confirmed it and two Republican Senators who now have lied about what he said. So let's not say he might have said it when the facts all point to him actually saying it. And frankly I don't think he cares because if he did care he would be tweeting more about it in denying it. He's not doing that because he's blowing his little dog whistle.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Show me proof that he said it, and I will never respect Tom Cotton again. Fair enough?

You say cotton is honest but he already lied. First he said he didn't hear it now he's saying he didn't say it. So which time was he more credible and which time did he lie? Off for a haircut and the gym now
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I saw a poll that says 32% of Americans approve of Trumps handling of race relationships. Isn't that about his favorability rating? I would guess it's all Republicans right?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And if the media portrayed him honestly, the number would be higher. How many people know that he helped fund medical missions to Haiti? How many people know that black unemployment is at record lows, and Trump is happy about that?

I concede he's not a good man. But he's not remotely what CNN wants him to be. He trounced them at their own game (by virtue of winning when they all said he was going to get clobbered, hell they convinced me) and they hate him for it. He pulled back the curtain and for a moment, showed us how dishonest and contemptible they are.

You say cotton is honest but he already lied. First he said he didn't hear it now he's saying he didn't say it. So which time was he more credible and which time did he lie? Off for a haircut and the gym now
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I didn't say he was honest. I said there's no evidence that he is dishonest. He wa sin the room, and didn't hear the remarks attributed to Trump. You show me proof that he's wrong, and I'll concede your point. I don't deny the obvious Paul.

I didn't say he was honest. I said there's no evidence that he is dishonest. He wa sin the room, and didn't hear the remarks attributed to Trump. You show me proof that he's wrong, and I'll concede your point. I don't deny the obvious Paul.

All you need to do is look at trumps past behavior and ask yourself..”would he really say that?” Of course he would say that.

Grab em by the pussy. You can do anything.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Not sure what you mean? Are you giving me a subtle hint that if so many people disagree, I must be wrong? Or are you sincerely wondering why so many people disagree?


Jim - I agree with you. Like almost any supply / demand issue if you flood a particular "market" or "segment" you create a glut in that segment and a competition for those lower tier jobs. If you keep "importing" people of poverty and/or lower skills, no matter how many people you have helped out of poverty you have replaced that person with the same. It is generally unfair to people that were in that position before. Now if you are not pulling as many out of poverty as you (Guv) continue to bring in you have an increase in poverty. Your percentages may even be same but due to pop growth have more people in poverty.

Now I am OK with bringing in more of the impoverished (legally) after a reduction in the people coming illegally but assimilate, have sponsors, chase education, and ATTAIN CITIZENSHIP!!!!

Black unemployment has never been as low as it is now. If Obama were still POTUS, they'd give him another Nobel Peace Prize for that. With Trump, the media won't discuss it. So they focus on something vulgar he might have said about Haiti, wherein he implied that it's a horribly run country. Imagine thinking that?
Black unemployment is low because unemployment in general is low.

Rand Paul hates Donald Trump. But he was on with Chuck Todd this weekend, explaining how much money Trump gave (before he entered politics) to support humanitarian missions to Haiti, medical mercy missions that Rand Paul, a doctor, was aware of. Trump was a major, major donor to these missions. If all he cared about was his net worth, and if he doesn't like Haitians, why would he do this? Answer...he wouldn't.
All I heard Rand Paul say was that Trump donated something, not that he was a major, major donor.

Sounds like a good tax deduction for the Donald. He needs a strong Haiti, it's where he gets most of his workers for Mar-A-Lago.

WDMSO, when you increase the supply of something, do you know what happens to the value of that something? It decreases. It is beyond dispute, that immigration has limited the ability of poor Americans to earn more.

That is a fact. And it's worth considering, when detailing immigration policy. We can't act like there's no downside.
This has been studied a lot and found that it's really not true. Many immigrants aren't low skilled and fill gaps in the workplace. A lot of low-skilled labor based jobs Americans simply don't want. Farmers that rely on immigrant workers continually face labor shortages.

I'm sure you can find some specific anecdotes where it's the case but in a general sense doesn't seem to pan out.

I didn't say he was honest. I said there's no evidence that he is dishonest. He wa sin the room, and didn't hear the remarks attributed to Trump. You show me proof that he's wrong, and I'll concede your point. I don't deny the obvious Paul.

But cotton and Purdue both change their story from saying they didn't hear the statement to now saying it didn't happen. What would have changed their mind was there a tape of it? I know you would concede that that is something president Trump would say.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

All I heard Rand Paul say was that Trump donated something, not that he was a major, major donor.

Sounds like a good tax deduction for the Donald. He needs a strong Haiti, it's where he gets most of his workers for Mar-A-Lago.

Rand Paul said that Trump showed that he cared very deeply for the Haitian people. That he donated money to save the vision of 200 Haitians.

Oh, but wait, if he was not a major, major donor, that's proof he is a racist. And if he hires Haitians to work at Mar-A-Lago, he hates them and is a bigot racist. And shame on Trump for getting a tax deduction for charitable donations.

You have said nothing here to show that Trump is a racist. And if you think you have said anything in this thread to show that he is a racist, then you are either deficient in logical thinking, or a political hack. One who might agree with another political operative like Democrat Rep. Luis Gutierrez who said: “We now know that we have in the White House someone who could lead the Ku Klux Klan in the United States of America, somebody who could be the leader of the Neo-Nazi."

For you, it would be perfectly appropriate for a politician to make an ad hominem attack like that, but to call Haiti a sh*thole is to be unfit for office.

#^&#^&#^&#^& Durbin has a track record of misrepresenting what was said in a closed door meeting in which no notes or recordings were made, such as this. He is one of the most vociferous personal attackers in the Senate. And he does not adhere to the traditional "collegiality" of Senate décor. The use of salty language during heated negotiations, especially when it is not directed at another member of the negotiation, need not be broadcast to the public, unless it is intended to harm the other member or his party. That's a cheap, dirty trick.

If Trump were a Democrat, or if he had agreed to all or most of what Durbin had proposed, would he have been outraged at Trump's language?

His own behavior reveals his true feelings.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Here is an interesting article about immigration and you can read the sources also.
Surprise, immigrants have always typically been poor people, even Norwegians.
https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2018/01/12/577673191/trump-wishes-we-had-more-immigrants-from-norway-turns-out-we-once-did

Here are some great examples of why Trump is labeled a racist.
In my eyes, when I see people defend this douchebag, I just see another racist or closet racist. Especially when they say ' everyone thinks these things, he just says what he thinks'.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/15/opinion/leonhardt-trump-racist.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur

The internet is full of examples of Trumps racists views, I don't have all day to read them all, nor do I need to; I've heard enough sh*thole type comments from him to know exactly what he is. If Trump donated money to third world countries, I'm pretty sure his accountant advised him he need some additional deductions; only so many bankruptcy you can file.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/15/opinion/leonhardt-trump-racist.html

Rand Paul said that Trump showed that he cared very deeply for the Haitian people. That he donated money to save the vision of 200 Haitians.

Oh, but wait, if he was not a major, major donor, that's proof he is a racist. And if he hires Haitians to work at Mar-A-Lago, he hates them and is a bigot racist. And shame on Trump for getting a tax deduction for charitable donations.

You have said nothing here to show that Trump is a racist. And if you think you have said anything in this thread to show that he is a racist, then you are either deficient in logical thinking, or a political hack. One who might agree with another political operative like Democrat Rep. Luis Gutierrez who said: “We now know that we have in the White House someone who could lead the Ku Klux Klan in the United States of America, somebody who could be the leader of the Neo-Nazi."

For you, it would be perfectly appropriate for a politician to make an ad hominem attack like that, but to call Haiti a sh*thole is to be unfit for office.

"Rand Paul said that Trump showed that he cared very deeply for the Haitian people. That he donated money to save the vision of 200 Haitians"

And Rand Paul hates Trump.

"if he was not a major, major donor, that's proof he is a racist"

That is the logic behind the arguments his opponents are making. It's amazing.

All you need to do is look at trumps past behavior and ask yourself..”would he really say that?” Of course he would say that.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Nebe, have you heard anyone suggest that Trump would never say such a thing? Sure he would. It's also true, that his adversaries are capable of making up lies about him. We don't know. If there's video or audio, I will be convinced. Until then, I don't have a problem taking the word of Tom Cotton, a Harvard Law graduate who signed up for the Army, and he chose combat infantry when he could have gone a cushier route.


Sounds like a good tax deduction for the Donald. He needs a strong Haiti, it's where he gets most of his workers for Mar-A-Lago.

Are democrats so altruistic that they don't deduct charitable donations? Are you feeling all right? Seriously, are you OK?

Calling Haiti a sh*thole makes him crass. It's not the least bit racist. Suggesting we take more immigrants from Norway might be racist, or he might be expressing the logical notion that if we have fewer penniless immigrants, and more who are self-sufficient, that makes it easier for us.

This has been studied a lot and found that it's really not true. Many immigrants aren't low skilled and fill gaps in the workplace. A lot of low-skilled labor based jobs Americans simply don't want. Farmers that rely on immigrant workers continually face labor shortages.

I'm sure you can find some specific anecdotes where it's the case but in a general sense doesn't seem to pan out.

"This has been studied a lot and found that it's really not true"

It's not true that increasing supply suppress prices? That's not true? Fascinating, what a breakthrough!

"Many immigrants aren't low skilled "

And many are. What percentage of the illegals would you say are low skilled?

"in a general sense doesn't seem to pan out"

So why do liberals bemoan that wages at the bottom are not rising?

Here are some great examples of why Trump is labeled a racist.
In my eyes, when I see people defend this douchebag, I just see another racist or closet racist. Especially when they say ' everyone thinks these things, he just says what he thinks'.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/15/opinion/leonhardt-trump-racist.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur

I called San Francisco a crap hole. Does that make me racist? What about if you drove through a crappy town like central falls and referred to it in a way that isn't exactly a complement,are you racist? If you were watching the news within he past two years and saw Aleppo getting torn to shreds and called it a craphole,would the left consider that racism. It is getting difficult to keep up. Nowadays I suppose you just say there is a lot of potential and move along so you don't hurt any feelings. Maybe distribute some puppies to pet.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No one comment on it's own would likely label him a racist, but the complete body of work that is Trump running off his mouth (when not reading speeches written for him), I think clearly does just that. He not only walks like a duck, looks like a duck, eats like a duck, he quacks the same way over and over again; me thinks he must be a duck.

So why do liberals bemoan that wages at the bottom are not rising?
A lot of factors here, automation technology, declines in unions, some due to cheap imports etc...the value of labor has declined but it's not primarily due to oversupply. Big problem is it's easier for the wealthy to make money with capital rather than investment in people.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I called San Francisco a crap hole. Does that make me racist? What about if you drove through a crappy town like central falls and referred to it in a way that isn't exactly a complement,are you racist? If you were watching the news within he past two years and saw Aleppo getting torn to shreds and called it a craphole,would the left consider that racism. It is getting difficult to keep up. Nowadays I suppose you just say there is a lot of potential and move along so you don't hurt any feelings. Maybe distribute some puppies to pet.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Are you making policy impacting the people of San Francisco?

Are your comments about San Francisco directed at a single race that you've previously disparaged?

Do you have a rich history of making statements many find racist and or racially divisive?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

A lot of factors here, automation technology,
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Interesting. Then why do liberals deny that increases in minimum wage, reduce the demand for minimum wage workers?

Spence, this is fascinating.

First, regarding immigration, liberals are denying that an influx of cheap supply of an item, will reduce its price.

Second, regarding the potential adverse effects of minimum wage hikes, liberals are denying that when you increase the cost of something, that the demand for that something will decrease.

I'm really, truly learning a lot here. Much of what I was taught about economics, supply & demand, and the elasticity of price, was all wrong. Wow.

Interesting. Then why do liberals deny that increases in minimum wage, reduce the demand for minimum wage workers?

Spence, this is fascinating.

First, regarding immigration, liberals are denying that an influx of cheap supply of an item, will reduce its price.

Second, regarding the potential adverse effects of minimum wage hikes, liberals are denying that when you increase the cost of something, that the demand for that something will decrease.

I'm really, truly learning a lot here. Much of what I was taught about economics, supply & demand, and the elasticity of price, was all wrong. Wow.
I've never heard anyone claim increased minimum wage decreases demand for those workers.

As for the other. You're trying to apply a very basic theory to a very complex situation with a lot more variables.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Are you making policy impacting the people of San Francisco?

Are your comments about San Francisco directed at a single race that you've previously disparaged?

Do you have a rich history of making statements many find racist and or racially divisive?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jeff, I was responding to Eben. That is why I quoted him in my post. I am hoping you understand the context of my post, if you don't then you are still a #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Never mind, I already know the answer.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I've never heard anyone claim increased minimum wage decreases demand for those workers.

As for the other. You're trying to apply a very basic theory to a very complex situation with a lot more variables.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"I've never heard anyone claim increased minimum wage decreases demand for those workers"

Of course you haven't, because they won't say that on MSNBC.

Spence, all other things being equal, when you increase the price of something, what happens to the demand?

"You're trying to apply a very basic theory to a very complex situation with a lot more variables"

Oh. So the liberals know that the GOP tax overhaul will cost 1.5 trillion, because that's a simple calculation with no moving pieces in a world where everything always stays exactly the same.

Never mind, I already know the answer.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There’s this cool term. It’s called “acting presidential”. The president is required to inspire us to do our best. He’s our leader. What we have is a classless douche who’s obviously a narcissist. Sad.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There’s this cool term. It’s called “acting presidential”. The president is required to inspire us to do our best. He’s our leader. What we have is a classless douche who’s obviously a narcissist. Sad.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

no one will deny that he's not presidential.

"The president is required to inspire us to do our best"

That's not remotely close to what I teach my kids. Our history is full of presidents who were not great role models. Not to Trump's magnitude, I grant that.

"He’s our leader"

true. And in many respects, especially the economy, he's a great leader. Nebe, I have always worked for large businesses. I'd rather have a world-class pr*ck as my CEO, who can outsmart my competition...than a well-meaning idiot who can't do anything right.

"What we have is a classless douche who’s obviously a narcissist. Sad."

He is all of those things. But that doesn't come close to meaning that he's not a good leader.

now the claim is that instead of Trump saying Shiitehole he said shiitehouse. yeah that changes the intent or the underlying sentiment. What a bunch of clowns.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

now the claim is that instead of Trump saying Shiitehole he said shiitehouse.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Clintonian...

There’s this cool term. It’s called “acting presidential”. The president is required to inspire us to do our best. He’s our leader. What we have is a classless douche who’s obviously a narcissist. Sad.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I agree wholeheartedly except with the president inspiring us. Not happening now,didn't used to happen for me. What about you, did a certain president inspire you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

now the claim is that instead of Trump saying Shiitehole he said shiitehouse. yeah that changes the intent or the underlying sentiment. What a bunch of clowns.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Does this imply that you don't like shiites?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Here are some great examples of why Trump is labeled a racist.
In my eyes, when I see people defend this douchebag, I just see another racist or closet racist. Especially when they say ' everyone thinks these things, he just says what he thinks'.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/15/opinion/leonhardt-trump-racist.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur

The only item in that list of supposed racisms that is more solid rather than innuendo, guilt by association, or outright misrepresentation, is Trump supposedly saying "laziness is a trait in blacks." But I would have to see the full context. And we may have some preconception of a particular trait in a race (many previous anthropologists, such as Margaret Meade, have claimed various traits in tribes or races based on their personal observations that proved out to be too selective or more general in human nature). And while we may comment on one perceived negative trait, we may have other perceptions of that race that are positive. For most of us who have not studied racial characteristics in depth and in a scientific manner, we fall prey to stereotypes. If you believe the stereotype that the Irish are drunkards, it won't necessarily mean that you dislike the Irish or think that they are inferior. If you say that white men can't jump, that doesn't mean you believe white men are inferior. Obviously, even if there were some genetic trait in the Irish to drink in excess, most probably don't. And some white men can jump. And you may just carelessly be latching on to a stereotype.

As for the rest of the article, my opinion is that it is mostly misinformation, and deliberately so. I was particularly amused by one large section presenting the titles of articles in Breitbart as some indication of racism. Really? The title of an article? Correctly reading the articles, as I did with the Milo Yiannopoulos article, doesn't bare out the supposed racism that your article claims to be inherent in their titles. And Breitbart is not Trump, anyway. And assuming guilt by association is deceitful.

Does this imply that you don't like shiites?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't know too many Shiites.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

statements many find racist . ..?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You mean like a squirrel finding a nut, or finding a stone and calling it a nut?

You mean like a squirrel finding a nut, or finding a stone and calling it a nut?
He’ll, even the speaker of the house called a remark of his racist. Whole lot of nuts.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He’ll, even the speaker of the house called a remark of his racist. Whole lot of nuts.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Can you explain, in your own words (I know you hang on every word of the Speaker and agree with every thing he says--or just when it's convenient), how it is racist?

Can you explain, in your own words (I know you hang on every word of the Speaker and agree with every thing he says--or just when it's convenient), how it is racist?

Because Paul Ryan said so, and Spence always agrees with Paul Ryan.

I don't know too many Shiites.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Great defense
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There’s this cool term. It’s called “acting presidential”. The president is required to inspire us to do our best. He’s our leader. What we have is a classless douche who’s obviously a narcissist. Sad.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


I’ll bet you thought Bill Clinton #^&#^&#^&#^&ing any & every woman he could, willing or not, was presidential !
Did he Inspire you ?
How about Hillary threatening some of the women he raped, did she inspire you ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Here is an interesting article about immigration and you can read the sources also.
Surprise, immigrants have always typically been poor people, even Norwegians.
https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2018/01/12/577673191/trump-wishes-we-had-more-immigrants-from-norway-turns-out-we-once-did

This was an interesting article which, though it may not be its intention, supports Jim's idea that importing low skilled people can have a negative impact on the economy of the immigrant receiving country. As in this from the article:

"Back then Norway was quite poor. Wages were less than a third of what they were in the United States. And the wave of emigration out of the country quickly benefited those who remained. That's because it reduced the supply of workers in Norway, so those left behind could demand higher wages. And this helped narrow Norway's wage gap with the U.S. by 25 percent over that same 40-year period, putting Norway on the path toward its status today as one of world's most prosperous nations."

So reducing the supply of workers allows the remaining workers the ability to get higher wages. And, conversely, as in Norway when it had excess workers, (and was a sh*thole) it decreases the wage potential of the receiving country by supplying it with more unskilled workers thus making it easier to fill the demand for them and to pay lower wages because of the competition for jobs. (And thus creates pockets of sh*tholes.)

Norway became "one of the world's most prosperous nations" today by dumping a whole lot of their low skill workers into America. And, today, many American low skill citizens are unemployed, on welfare, and those who are employed are paid less because there is an over supply of them.

Now, the notion that Trump is off the mark when he would rather have immigrants from Norway than unskilled ones from sh*tholes because the past immigrants from Norway were just as unskilled and poor as are those from present day sh*tholes is not, at least if this article is correct, off the mark. The immigrants from Norway today would not be the same as the ignorant, unskilled ones of the past. That's the point of why he would prefer immigrants from places like Norway of today. He wants the kind of immigrants who made Norway one of the most prosperous countries in the world.

This was an interesting article which, though it may not be its intention, supports Jim's idea that importing low skilled people can have a negative impact on the economy of the immigrant receiving country. As in this from the article:

"Back then Norway was quite poor. Wages were less than a third of what they were in the United States. And the wave of emigration out of the country quickly benefited those who remained. That's because it reduced the supply of workers in Norway, so those left behind could demand higher wages. And this helped narrow Norway's wage gap with the U.S. by 25 percent over that same 40-year period, putting Norway on the path toward its status today as one of world's most prosperous nations."

So reducing the supply of workers allows the remaining workers the ability to get higher wages. And, conversely, as in Norway when it had excess workers, (and was a sh*thole) it decreases the wage potential of the receiving country by supplying it with more unskilled workers thus making it easier to fill the demand for them and to pay lower wages because of the competition for jobs. (And thus creates pockets of sh*tholes.)

Norway became "one of the world's most prosperous nations" today by dumping a whole lot of their low skill workers into America. And, today, many American low skill citizens are unemployed, on welfare, and those who are employed are paid less because there is an over supply of them.

Now, the notion that Trump is off the mark when he would rather have immigrants from Norway than unskilled ones from sh*tholes because the past immigrants from Norway were just as unskilled and poor as are those from present day sh*tholes is not, at least if this article is correct, off the mark. The immigrants from Norway today would not be the same as the ignorant, unskilled ones of the past. That's the point of why he would prefer immigrants from places like Norway of today. He wants the kind of immigrants who made Norway one of the most prosperous countries in the world.
That was over a hundred years ago.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That was over a hundred years ago.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

We can all read. Why are you essentially repeating a not terribly significant bit of information that's in the article?

Immigration is used, admits a Democrat, as a means to gain political power.

http://www.gopusa.com/?p=37084?omhide=true

The memo states that: “The fight to protect Dreamers is not only a moral imperative, it is also a critical component of the Democratic Party’s future electoral success,”

“If Democrats don’t try to do everything in their power to defend Dreamers, that will jeopardize Democrats’ electoral chances in 2018 and beyond,” Palmieri concluded her memo to Democratic leaders.

The U.N. classifies Haiti very low on its human development index:

http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/HDI

The U.N. is racist.

We can all read. Why are you essentially repeating a not terribly significant bit of information that's in the article?
I was under the assumption a little critical thinking would draw out my intent.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Immigration is used, admits a Democrat, as a means to gain political power.

http://www.gopusa.com/?p=37084?omhide=true

The memo states that: “The fight to protect Dreamers is not only a moral imperative, it is also a critical component of the Democratic Party’s future electoral success,”

“If Democrats don’t try to do everything in their power to defend Dreamers, that will jeopardize Democrats’ electoral chances in 2018 and beyond,” Palmieri concluded her memo to Democratic leaders.
The idea that supporting a policy most Americans agree with that will bring crucial Hispanic support is in any way a gotcha is absurd.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Great defense
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I do get praised for my good defense in our Thur. night basketball games :wave:

Now combine low skilled immigrants with this and reach a logical conclusion:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/paul-ryans-recipe-for-a-robust-economy-have-more-babies/2017/12/15/dcd767b4-e1dc-11e7-89e8-edec16379010_story.html?utm_term=.2c43446e79f5

Now combine low skilled immigrants with this and reach a logical conclusion:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/paul-ryans-recipe-for-a-robust-economy-have-more-babies/2017/12/15/dcd767b4-e1dc-11e7-89e8-edec16379010_story.html?utm_term=.2c43446e79f5

The article admits that we have a low fertility rate and that it is a problem. But it avoids a deeper analysis of why that is. It claims that Republican policies are the problem. However, it doesn't mention that low birth rates, even lower than in the U.S., are endemic to all Western societies, especially in Europe which has the kind of economic policies that the article says Republicans should promote.

It doesn't mention the impact of the thousands of babies aborted every year for convenience. It doesn't mention leftists policies that push free birth control. It doesn't mention environmentalist's (I'm sure WAPO is in favor of environmentalist policies) call for lowering population numbers. It doesn't talk about Progressive deconstruction of genders which normalizes various sexualities which don't reproduce. It doesn't reflect on life style choices in the West that call for less and later birth choices--it claims that these choices are due to economic policies. It takes money to raise children. If you want more and better things, having less or no children helps to pay for that.

But it's not that middle or upper America can't afford more children. It's that they choose not to for what Ryan might consider selfish reasons.

It's the poorer (and yes "minorities are a large part of the poor) who are more "careless" about getting pregnant, who we want to get, and to help get, abortions. But we already have policies to help the poor raise children. The child tax credit favors middle and upper income families way more than the poor. And the middle and upper can afford children, but choose to have less or none or later because they value more goodies than more children.

The article blames the Republican tax plan for potentially suppressing birth rates. But lower birth rates have occurred already before the implementation of the tax plan. And the plan gives some more money back to the lower economic ladder. And generous European social welfare plans do not help boost birth rates. If the resulting lower birth rates are any evidence, they seem to suppress or lower birth rates.

So, rather than change the Western cultural shift which trends toward pleasure rather than parenthood, the article suggests that since the Republicans won't fix our "demographic difficulties" with government economic manipulation, we should resort to immigration to fill the void. It doesn't explore what demographic and cultural changes will result from such a solution. Perhaps the WAPO, being leftist, knows the change would favor the election of Progressives to power and the ensuing growth and power of government--the power of the State rather than of the individual. And that is perfectly reasonable for those who have been acculturated into the me-without-responsibility type or offshoot of individualism--the selfish "me generation" Boomers who have now come of age in the power circles of our country. Those who have accepted the Faustian bargain of selling their souls to the power of government to take care of all their society's functional needs as well as many of their personal ones so that they can spend their time and money on having the materially "good life."

Western Europe, especially Germany, has long used immigration as a means to supplement its working class to compensate for it's low fertility rates. It is now reaping an unanticipated result. There has been a demographic shift from a Post WWII freer democratic society to a more authoritarian one where the "native" Europeans have less to say about a maintenance of their characteristic cultures and are forced to change into a global view of their identity. And as the immigrant families have higher birth rates complimented with the continuing influx of even more numerous immigration from other cultures antithetic to the European's own, European culture is gradually replaced. Culturally and individually complex Western civilization "evolves" into a homogenous one world dominated by a strong "politically correct" centralized government, but a weak population of disempowered (but nice "life style" for the few better offs) citizens.

Ultimately, the responsibility of maintaining a free society rests on the people, not the government. Government is the antithesis of freedom. The more powerful and expansive the government is, the less free are individuals. The old adage still applies to a free society--that government which governs least, governs best."

Selfishness has its good use. What you are selfish about determines the type and quality of life you have in a free society. Of course, under forms of predominantly authoritarian government you have limited ability to be selfish. In a society of free people, if you make the wrong selfish choices, you endanger your freedom. If you choose not to produce the next generation that will maintain your culture of freedom, the children you do produce may well lose that freedom. If you are selfish to preserve that which you consider being free and being good, you had better not constrain your natural drive of bearing children to the point that there are not enough to maintain what you desire.

And then, there is also that Progressive contradiction--the notion that we must somehow preserve the natural world against our degradation of it. Yet, there is this unnatural predilection of progressives to denature us. To make us these automatons of the State who can be manipulated into various genders and sexualities, who can be artificially manipulated from one class into another, who can be transformed into a universal "correctness" in which we are somehow "diverse" yet essentially the same and equal. Somehow, the power in the natural universe must not be endangered by humans, but the natural proclivities and power of humans must be molded into a preferred image concocted by some supposedly super class of technocrats. And the triumph of this ideology, of course, will solve all problems including the obsolescence of nations and cultures and discriminations and any need to "immigrate" or to choose life styles or to choose the number of children to have. The "nature" of child birth is reduced to some form of central planning. And the embedded, artificially created and implanted notion of some blissfully controlled future surely has an effect, subliminally if not actually, on the psyche of those when they think about having children.

But more to the immediate point, if you choose to keep bringing in more people from other cultures who have different views of government and different selfish goals, and they have birth rates which exponentially and naturally expand, while your birth rates fall below even replacement numbers naturally devolve into a smaller and disappearing population, then the "logical conclusion" is obvious.

"But more to the immediate point, if you choose to keep bringing in more people from other cultures who have different views of government and different selfish goals, and they have birth rates which exponentially and naturally expand, while your birth rates fall below even replacement numbers naturally devolve into a smaller and disappearing population, then the "logical conclusion" is obvious."

We will get browner?
Or less Christian?
Luckily I am an acceptable blend: One grandparent heritage from new Amsterdam and ones heritage from england with a recent swede and recent norwegian, I assume that did not dilute the Master Race.
You don't think it costs a lot to have a child in the USA?
And what do you get for spending the long dollar?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/16/why-does-it-cost-32093-just-to-give-birth-in-america

That was over a hundred years ago.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So supply and demand was a real thing 100 years ago, but sometime after that, it ceased to exist?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So supply and demand was a real thing 100 years ago, but sometime after that, it ceased to exist?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So why did America not suffer from the influx of all those immigrants from Norway when they arrived ? This counters your argument it doesn’t support it. And after 20 some years those from Norway were making 20% less the native born workers very similar to today’s immigrants
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Exactly, better than even under Obama, and his approval rating among black minorities is up too

Black unemployment is at an historical low. If he's a white supremacist, he's not a very good white supremacist.

He's an unbelievable jerk.

"But more to the immediate point, if you choose to keep bringing in more people from other cultures who have different views of government and different selfish goals, and they have birth rates which exponentially and naturally expand, while your birth rates fall below even replacement numbers naturally devolve into a smaller and disappearing population, then the "logical conclusion" is obvious."
We will get browner?
Or less Christian?
Luckily I am an acceptable blend: One grandparent heritage from new Amsterdam and ones heritage from england with a recent swede and recent norwegian, I assume that did not dilute the Master Race.
You don't think it costs a lot to have a child in the USA?
And what do you get for spending the long dollar?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/16/why-does-it-cost-32093-just-to-give-birth-in-america

Are you trying to instill race into my point of view? If you believe that brown people, whatever you mean by that, cannot have the same view on government as that on which this country was founded, perhaps you're a racist.

And I congratulate you on your acceptable blend of white European people. My blend may not be as acceptable to you. It has some different colors in it, different cultures, different religions, but I choose to adhere to the founding governmental principles of this country. And I don't know which race is the master. It seems that different parts of the world have different racial masters. Ask the Chinese which is the Master Race.

If all people are fungible, then it doesn't matter if you replace home grown people on whom we have spent resources, blood and treasure, to educate and acculturate to American values of individual freedom and limited government, with anybody else from anywhere in the world. If all people are equally replaceable, nothing fundamental will change with waves of immigration.

But if all people are fungible, then why do we have so many of our own who will not do what folks from other countries will? And why do so many of our own prefer socialism to free markets? If bringing in millions to provide the labor that we lack to run the market system we have, how are we assured that they will not essentially be the same fungible types as those who are born here and would rather be dependent on government. And who will not, with higher fertility rates, produce even more of those who are socialist minded, thus requiring even more immigrants who we hope will provide us the labor to sustain what will become an overwhelming mass who are dependent on the labor of others.

Under socialism, there is no need to import people. All the able bodied people must work. In a free market system, people cannot be forced by government to work. They must be personally motivated to work. One sure way of destroying a free market system is to dilute the motivation to work by creating an overweening welfare system. And then to top that off with a demand for forced equality. Then, ironically, bringing in millions more to do what our welfare recipients won't, and who will then participate in and add, with their fecundity, to the same systemic problem. Which will eventually overburden a free market's ability to sustain. The answer then, will be to instill a form of true socialism.

It's curious that you posted an article which showed Norway's success in transforming its status from a sh*thole to one of the most prosperous countries by dumping masses of its poor into this country, but now you seem to accept that bringing in masses of the poor from sh*thole countries will benefit us. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

And, yes I know the cost of raising children. But passing the cost off to society does not lower it. When society takes on cost, it raises taxes or borrows (which is a hidden way of passing on the cost back to us, especially to the children for whom we were given money to raise). There is a level of governmental funding beyond which it becomes unsustainable. Government funding costs are already unsustainable. Funding even more to make it easier for a mass influx of low wage immigrants who have a high birth rate is far more destructive of an economy than helpful.

We are given, by nature, the motivation to have children. It is an essential feature of being living creatures. We humans have this fabulous ability to sidestep nature and to create ever increasingly unnatural worlds. Do you think that the masses of natural breeders will have some children and many grandchildren who won't want to participate in all the artificial wonders. And who won't sidestep nature by not reproducing at sufficient rates.

Our problem, as a society, stems from our own disconnect with our fundamental nature. And it is an extremely seductive disconnect. Immigration cannot solve it. We have enough people. We shouldn't have to import more. The imports or their progeny will succumb to the same problem. And it will either bankrupt us, or we will go whole hog and create an entirely regulated system which determines how many . . . and whom. Some say AI is the answer--evolving into computerized robots.

Or we can more seriously reconnect with our inherent, somewhat messy but freedom loving natural humanity with its love of children, having, and raising them. And securing that free and loving way of life for them.

So why did America not suffer from the influx of all those immigrants from Norway when they arrived ? This counters your argument it doesn’t support it. And after 20 some years those from Norway were making 20% less the native born workers very similar to today’s immigrants
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

At that time, we didn't have poor Americans who would not do what the poor immigrants will do. At that time, there was actually a shortage of and a need for workers in an expanding market economy. Now we are told that we have a supply of Americans who simply won't do what immigrants will do for the wages they will accept. So we have an artificial need for workers. And the system that allows for people not to work and still get by, will entice a lot of immigrants (if we allow a lot) to take advantage of such benefits. And their children and grandchildren will certainly learn the American way of avoiding doing what immigrants will do, and so will enlarge the problem and create the constant need to import more people, and the cycle will continue until a big enough crisis occurs to finally do something to stop it. That something may be more undesirable than the cycle itself. Or it might be a good thing. Whatever it is, it will be necessary.

We are already seeing the cycle occurring. We have had floods of immigrants, legal and illegal, since the 1960's. But that has not solved our so-called shortage of labor problem. We still, supposedly, need more.

I was under the assumption a little critical thinking would draw out my intent.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

My post did quite a bit of critical thinking. You post here did none.

The idea that supporting a policy most Americans agree with that will bring crucial Hispanic support is in any way a gotcha is absurd.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It wasn't a gotcha, it was factual evidence, proof, that the Dems use immigration as a means to get power. And the "most Americans agree with" meme is conjured up with a great deal of moral sounding propaganda supported by a willing Progressive press. And "crucial Hispanic support" is part of the symbiotic relationship that the Democrat party needs to persuade various minority groups to vote for it. It thrives on dividing us into group rights which it promises to enforce. It divides us to win. They may call it a moral imperative. But it is an immoral, deceitful way of creating a Progressive system of government. They pretend to support a constitutional system of government which guaranties some elusive "equality" for all, but will actually nullify the Constitution and subjugate us all to that which their experts decide is good for us.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qjxb3Dz-4lM

At that time, we didn't have poor Americans who would not do what the poor immigrants will do. need more.

oh ok .. and the welfare argument

It's curious that you posted an article which showed Norway's success in transforming its status from a sh*thole to one of the most prosperous countries by dumping masses of its poor into this country,



We actually got more people from Sweden during the same time period then from Norway sent a higher % .. which is the size of new Mexico ...
So to praise Norway as becoming one of the most prosperous countries is not really True for that time period and that took like 60-to 70 years to make the transition

More time machine reasoning comparing today with something that happened over 100 years ago.. So lets go back to the roman days i am sure we could find an event that you could use as well

it is true that today ...Norway it is ranked 1st
on the Legatum Prosperity Index 2017 and the USA 18th

They pretend to support a constitutional system of government which guaranties some elusive "equality" for all, but will actually nullify the Constitution and subjugate us all to that which their experts decide is good for us.

You think Trump and the republicans are supporters a constitutional system of government???

you mat need to think again their action contradict your observation

We can all read. Why are you essentially repeating a not terribly significant bit of information that's in the article?
Becaus it's terribly significant.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It wasn't a gotcha, it was factual evidence, proof, that the Dems use immigration as a means to get power. And the "most Americans agree with" meme is conjured up with a great deal of moral sounding propaganda supported by a willing Progressive press. And "crucial Hispanic support" is part of the symbiotic relationship that the Democrat party needs to persuade various minority groups to vote for it. It thrives on dividing us into group rights which it promises to enforce. It divides us to win. They may call it a moral imperative. But it is an immoral, deceitful way of creating a Progressive system of government. They pretend to support a constitutional system of government which guaranties some elusive "equality" for all, but will actually nullify the Constitution and subjugate us all to that which their experts decide is good for us.
It means they are acting in the interests of their constituents.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

oh ok .. and the welfare argument

?????????????????????????

Maybe Trump called Haiti a shiitehouse bc he knew the story of his paying off hookers to keep quit was about to break.

Exactly, better than even under Obama, and his approval rating among black minorities is up too

What because Trump says so and his news network Fox says so:), I'd say it ain't so.


https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/17/us/politics/factcheck-trump-black-americans-support.html

We actually got more people from Sweden during the same time period then from Norway sent a higher % .. which is the size of new Mexico ...
So to praise Norway as becoming one of the most prosperous countries is not really True for that time period and that took like 60-to 70 years to make the transition

Yes, as the article implied, Norway was a sh*thole at that time. Shipping out its poor unskilled allowed it to gradually get out of the hole and rise to prosperity. From sh*thole to #1 in 60 years is not an easy task. Know any other countries that have done that. And, along the way there was a constant rise to get there. Norway didn't, nor has anyone else risen from the bottom to the top immediately.


More time machine reasoning comparing today with something that happened over 100 years ago.. So lets go back to the roman days i am sure we could find an event that you could use as well

Historians make such comparisons all the time. What is your time limit for searching the past for how political and human actions affect society?

it is true that today ...Norway it is ranked 1st
on the Legatum Prosperity Index 2017 and the USA 18th

And . . . .

You think Trump and the republicans are supporters a constitutional system of government???

you mat need to think again their action contradict your observation

If you don't want to, or can't, actually have a thorough discussion on what is constitutional, then don't pretend you're making any point with this post.

Becaus it's terribly significant.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Tell me about it.

It means they are acting in the interests of their constituents.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thought you didn't approve of circle jerks.

Tell me about it.
Busy building a strong economy.

Busy building a strong economy.

If I recall a similar post by you in some other post in the previous year or so, you've been doing this for a while. Your efforts seem to have gotten some better results lately. Maybe we should be giving you credit instead of Trump.

If I recall a similar post by you in some other post in the previous year or so, you've been doing this for a while. Your efforts seem to have gotten some better results lately. Maybe we should be giving you credit instead of Trump.
Pass the credit to Obama. And yes the red eye feels great this morning. Thanks.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pass the credit to Obama. And yes the red eye feels great this morning. Thanks.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You're too generous and self-effacing.

Another needle in the haystack for WDMSO. Actually, WD, the videos on these subjects that I've posted are not scarce. There are plenty of them. I just link a new one every now and then. For your enjoyment:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Txk-CZRFEoQ

Another Trump hire. Trump and his team keep dragging all of us into the gutter. The Trump apologists will soon rush to his defense.


An appointee of President Donald Trump has resigned from the federal agency that runs AmeriCorps and other service programs after remarks he made disparaging blacks, Muslims, gays, women, veterans with PTSD and undocumented immigrants surfaced in the news media.

Carl Higbie, of Greenwich, Conn., lasted less than six months as the chief of external affairs in the Corporation for National and Community Service.

Higbie's Thursday afternoon resignation, which was prompted after CNN unearthed the comments he reportedly made, comes amid increased scrutiny of the president's appointees for racist or anti-Muslim statements made in the past.

In November, the Department of Homeland Security's Jamie Johnson, another Trump appointee, resigned after comments he made that linked blacks to "laziness" and "promiscuity" came to light. Last week, Pete Hoekstra, the new U.S. ambassador to the Netherlands and a former Republican congressman, apologized after uproar over baseless anti-Muslim theories he had spread multiple times in past.

According to the reporting and audio clips published by CNN on Thursday, Higbie had a lengthy track record of making strongly racist and anti-Muslim statements before his appointment.

In 2013, he spoke about giving away free firewood while working in Virginia Beach on "Sound of Freedom," an Internet talk radio show that he hosted, according to CNN. Higbie said that black women think "breeding is a form of government employment," and that blacks were "lax of morality," and that culture "is breeding this welfare and the high percentage of people on welfare in the black race."

In another talk show appearance in 2013, he expressed dislike for the term "African-Americans."

"The whole African-American thing gets me whipped up because it's like 99 percent - and I'm paraphrasing here - of people who write down African-American have never been to Africa," he said.

He also spoke disparagingly of Islam, saying that he didn't like Muslims "because their ideology sucks," and that he was fine if his views caused him to be labeled a racist.

"I just don't like Muslim people. People always rip me a new one for that. 'Carl, you're racist, you can't, you're sexist.' I'm like Jesus Christ," Higbie said on "Sound of Freedom" in 2013.

On another podcast, Warrior Talk Radio, in 2014, according to CNN, he struck a similar chord.

"I was called an Islamophobe and I was like, 'no, no, no, no, no, I'm not afraid of them. I don't like them. Big difference,' " he said on the show. "And they were like, 'Well, you're racist.' I was like, fine if that's the definition of it, then I guess I am.'"

This is not the first round of controversy for Higbie, who worked as the spokesman for pro-Trump super PAC Great America before the 2016 election. During an appearance on Fox News shortly after the election, he cited Japanese internment camps during World War II as a "precedent" for some of the president's potential immigration plans and the remarks drew wide condemnation.

Nonetheless, he was appointed to the position at the CNCS, which runs AmeriCorps and other volunteering initiatives, and has programs dedicated to rebuilding after natural disasters and supporting veterans and their families, including helping them transition once they return home.

In other audio unearthed by CNN, Higbie, a former Navy SEAL, derided military veterans with PTSD as having "a weak mind," and said he thought a large majority of people with PTSD were being dishonest.

"I'd say 75 percent of people with PTSD don't actually
have it, and they're either milking something for a little extra money in disability or they're just, they honestly are just lying," he said on another talk radio show in 2014.

Samantha Jo Warfield, a CNCS spokeswoman, declined to comment on the circumstances of Higbie's resignation.

Of undocumented immigrants, Higbie, on another episode of "Sound of Freedom" in 2013, said that Americans with guns should be able to shoot undocumented immigrants who attempted to cross into the United States at the border.

"What's so wrong with wanting to put up a fence and saying, 'Hey, everybody with a gun, if you want to go shoot people coming across our border illegally, you can do it fo' free,'" Higbie said. "You cross my border, I will shoot you in the face. I will go down there. I'll volunteer to go down there and stand on that border for, I don't know, a week or so at a time and that'll be my civil duty."

He also spoke harshly about Sen. Dianne Feinstein, also on "Sound of Freedom," calling the California Democrat a "bitch," and saying he'd love to smack her and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's heads together.

"Nothing gets me going like Ted Cruz, when he went off on that Feinstein bitch about the Second Amendment. And he put her in her place, that was just fantastic. I can't stand that woman," Higbie said. "Her and Pelosi. I'd love to just take both their heads and smack them together a couple of times."

During another appearance on "Sound of Freedom," he spoke about the legalization of gay marriage in Rhode Island.

"Congratuf'in'lations, you suck, Rhode Island. Why would you do that?' he said. "I mean, you are breaking the morals, the moral fiber of our country. You know, I don't like gay people. I just don't."

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

More time machine reasoning comparing today with something that happened over 100 years ago.. So lets go back to the roman days i am sure we could find an event that you could use as well


PeteF.'s article about early Norwegian immigrants supports Trump's idea of who to accept as immigrants and also supports supply side economics. Spence and you chirp in about it being 100 years ago. Well, if that makes the ideas in the article obsolete, why didn't you negate the whole thing instead of just what you don't like while asking why we did not suffer from the influx of all those earlier immigrants? If it was a century ago, according to your "time machine" meme, it would not be relevant information. It actually, on the contrary, is asking to examine what happened 100 years ago to come to some conclusion relevant to today.

I replied that our American poor were willing to work for lower wages. So it wasn't a question of filling jobs that Americans wouldn't do, but was an actual shortage of labor.

You also asked or said "Oh ok . . and the welfare argument" which was too enigmatically stated to understand. But that reminds me about another key element which affected the view on work back then. We didn't have the generous federal government support for the unemployed 100 years ago. There was no incentive offered by government to refuse low paying jobs. So there was no surplus of American born who could but wouldn't work. They were not only willing to work, they had to. And the immigrants had to pay their own way to get here, and pay their own way to stay here. That's why it didn't hurt us, was not a drag on the economy or government spending and debt, but actually helped us.

Today, that's entirely different. Due to our comfortable "safety net" and generous government assistance to immigrants, which in itself makes it attractive to come here and take advantage of, even if work is not found.

So yes, the "time machine" operates differently today. And that is one of the reasons why mass immigration today is harmful and why it wasn't 100 years ago.

BTW, this notion that what happened beyond the very recent past is not instructive for us today is ignorant. It is a cockamamy idea probably filtered down to a common point of view from the vague intellectual heights of postmodern philosophy. It is mostly that philosophy which has transformed our academic views about society and existence into a gaggle of relativistic deconstructions, such as tens of gender identities, all of which melds into a regressive cultural Marxism that devalues anything beyond the moment, and even that is questionable.

All the great literature, art, music of the past is still relevant and enjoyable. Beethoven's 9th is not only still performed around the world, but is revered, inspiring, and overall more popular and lasting than all of our modern popular music. Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment, is still a gripping psychological study. Tsung Tsu's Art of War is still studied by military experts as well as is some of the formations of the Roman Legions. Shakespeare is still considered the greatest writer in the English language.

Human nature has not changed since it was first recorded. That's why I said in a previous post that we should motivate our physically capable unemployed to do lower wage work that immigrants are willing to do, by making it a swim or sink proposition--as was the case with earlier Americans and immigrants. Do the work that is available or find some charity or family resource, or accept far more basic and less comfortable government provided help than is offered today.

Here are some great examples of why Trump is labeled a racist.
In my eyes, when I see people defend this douchebag, I just see another racist or closet racist. Especially when they say ' everyone thinks these things, he just says what he thinks'.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/15/opinion/leonhardt-trump-racist.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur

Here's another list of Trumps supposed racisms. Can anyone explain how and why they are racist?

http://beta.latimes.com/politics/la-na-trump-racism-remarks-20180111-htmlstory.html