• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

General political chat

21stamps

Well-Known Member

draybook

Well-Known Member

Tony the Tigger

Well-Known Member
The issue is not whether empathy/sympathy exists for these and others, but rather how reasonable or effective it is to form policy with these sort of feelz forming the basis.
Or how messed up is it that they are made to struggle through no fault of their own and have zero to do with the policy at hand?

This is our fault. Especially our leaders, but all of ours as a country. Not enough are pressuring those leaders, and too many are satisfied with a gimmick (the wall) instead of policy, or think they are better than the government workers. They aren’t.
 

OneofThree

Well-Known Member
Or how messed up is it that they are made to struggle through no fault of their own and have zero to do with the policy at hand?
Very unfortunate, and I've expressed as much.

This is our fault. Especially our leaders, but all of ours as a country. Not enough are pressuring those leaders, and too many are satisfied with a gimmick (the wall) instead of policy, or think they are better than the government workers. They aren’t.
:oops: "Better"? Who believes that? No, I don't believe that Congress should be swayed by every outpouring of drama from a society suffering from collective psychological disorder.
 

Willmark

Well-Known Member
Last edited:

kong1802

Well-Known Member
NP.

I don’t alwsys agree with reason and sometimes some of the writers put out some stuff that is not very libertarian.

That said the site looks at things from a personal liberty and libertarian lense more often than not.
I've been using it more and more to help "triangulate" stories.

I don't agree with everything on there either, but I feel like most of their stories or articles are very well laid out, using facts/figures. I felt it was a good read on the issue. Obviously some will disagree with this particular writer's stance on the wall subject, but it doesn't seem politically motivated, which we should all celebrate.
 

Willmark

Well-Known Member
I've been using it more and more to help "triangulate" stories.

I don't agree with everything on there either, but I feel like most of their stories or articles are very well laid out, using facts/figures. I felt it was a good read on the issue. Obviously some will disagree with this particular writer's stance on the wall subject, but it doesn't seem politically motivated, which we should all celebrate.
Its a very liberating thing once you realize that most everything you’ve been told by the major news sources is with a bias (some light, some extreme) and that horseshoe theory is real, ie the two major parties are more alike than not especially towards the ends of the horseshoe.
 

draybook

Well-Known Member
Same reason we didn't see the "outrage" to build more....
That's a very "I know you are but what am I" response but no. There was selective outrage from the very lifelong politicians that are now targeting Trump. They were fine with spending gobs of money on virtual walls, beefed up border patrol and extra manpower to deport those caught but God forbid someone mentions putting up extra physical barriers that might prevent them from getting here in the first place.

After all, we wouldn't want to seem unwelcoming to illegals. Shoot, the next thing you know, we'll create a federal agency whose job it is is to deport those who come here illegally. I hope we never reach that point. Give me your tired, your...well, you guys have heard that bit already.
 

kong1802

Well-Known Member
That's a very "I know you are but what am I" response but no. There was selective outrage from the very lifelong politicians that are now targeting Trump. They were fine with spending gobs of money on virtual walls, beefed up border patrol and extra manpower to deport those caught but God forbid someone mentions putting up extra physical barriers that might prevent them from getting here in the first place.

After all, we wouldn't want to seem unwelcoming to illegals. Shoot, the next thing you know, we'll create a federal agency whose job it is is to deport those who come here illegally. I hope we never reach that point. Give me your tired, your...well, you guys have heard that bit already.
Everyone (on the right) seems to be really clinging to what a few of the dems in power did in 2006 or even 2013. Again, I don't think that because they voted for x back then means they now have to give $5.7 billion. I can't speak for those in power, but I can say that based on what I've seen, #1 the $5.7 billion is just a start, #2 the money can be used more effectively elsewhere, #3 there is no crisis.

To my " I know you are but what am I" response, I was pointing out that we could go all day with those prompts. The "why did they care then but not now" card can be pulled out all the time. See deficit......
 

Jim S

Well-Known Member
I know we hate links here, but this was a great read. Whether you agree with or not I felt it was well laid out. Thanks again @Willmark for this site.

https://reason.com/blog/2019/01/10/a-real-wall-against-a-fake-threat-wont-m

This article failed to mention the republicans have requested additional money for technology equipment to detect drugs at points of entry.

Focused on asylum seekers for the most part as if they are the only ones coming across our border. Why that approach? Agenda.

Economic hardship does not qualify for asylum. Did this reporter know that?

Does this reporter know that the president has more info than this reporter to determine if it is a crisis. Wonder why this reporter didn't mention in 2014 the WaPO, Huffington Post, Cnn, ABC news referred to the crisis on the border. Oh forgot Obama was president and if he said it was a crisis they fell in line.

Citing statistics from various years shows this reporter in not aware of the fluid situation on our border.

Reporter did not bother to even talk to the experts-the Border Patrol about a wall. Why didn't the reporter talk to Mark Morgan, Obama's Border Chief, about his absolute conviction we need a border wall.

This article was pathetic and shows a reporter that did not do the required homework, ignored important information, and wanted those that read it to believe the reporter's limited and bias perspective. It was a joke in my opinion.
 
Top Bottom