• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republican candidate announces 'deportation bus tour' for undocumented immigrants (1 Viewer)

It's people like you who don't get the principles this country was founded upon.

That's a pretty silly observation.
The colonists and most of the founders were WASP supremacists who drove the Indians over the mountains & established
a society of white christian men & women along with African slaves.
 
Another GOP candidate tweeted about euthanasia for food stamp recipients. This is surely the party of the people.
 
So, the rapist, murderers, kidnappers, child molesters, and other criminals are being stigmatized for breaking the law to enter our country illegally?

I am all tore up.

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk

All Trump supporters are white supremacists, yes?
 
Another GOP candidate tweeted about euthanasia for food stamp recipients. This is surely the party of the people.

lol Are you for real? I have to go check that one out.


EDIT: Yes, it's true. To be fair, it looks it might have been the account admin but still holy **** are these people losing their minds.

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/05/ok...s-euthanasia-disabled-poor-avoid-food-stamps/

“Most receiving food stamps work, or are disabled,” a user commented on the poll post. “Some are elderly.”

“The ones who are disabled and can’t work…why are we required to keep them?” the Chrisforgov account responded. “Sorry but euthanasia is cheaper and doesn’t make everyone a slave to the Government [sic].”

Defending his now-deleted comments, the account admin mused as to why American taxpayers should “have to keep up people who cannot contribute to society any longer?”
 
Last edited:
So you are against deporting people who have broken our laws?

If they have committed no other crime than coming here illegally, yes I am against deporting those people.

If people want to come to our country to work and contribute to our society I have no issues with them and would be against deporting those people. Some of our main problems here are not securing our borders and properly vetting the people coming in.

But let's not go down the "broken our laws" road because I am pretty sure there are more than a few laws you don't mind being broken.
 
That's a pretty silly observation.
The colonists and most of the founders were WASP supremacists who drove the Indians over the mountains & established
a society of white christian men & women along with African slaves.


You want to talk about silly observations. You just basically said that this nation was founded upon establishment of white christian supremacy. So then, if that what we were? Is that what is we should remain? The man credited with writing that most famous and elegant phrase in our Declaration of Independence; "We believe that all men are created equal" was a white slave owner from Virginia named Thomas Jefferson. But I think we would be wrong in assuming that he wasn't aware of the inherent hypocrisy of what he wrote. Jefferson's relationship with slavery was a complex one. While he did own many slaves, many of them inherited, he worked passionately, albeit quietly, behind the scenes to bring the practice of slavery to an end. That is not to say that Jefferson was not a racist. He definitely was one. He believed that the black slaves were inherently inferior "in mind and body" and would never be able to make the successful transformation to becoming 'freemen' in this country because they were not intellectually equipped to be able to do so.

Jefferson's voice on slavery went largely silent in the late 1780s and 1790s. Likewise when it came to what to do about the Indians Jefferson didn't appear to have any answer for it. Jefferson was also forced to come to the realization through his enormous debt being primarily offset by the wealth associated with his owning of slaves. Which were a valued property asset just like any other business or personal asset of the time. That he could reasonably suspect that such was probably the case with many southern slave owners and for the South in general whose economy relied heavily on slave labor. Also many in South were fearful that continued talk of the immorality of slavery would lead to slave revolts. This Jefferson knew was an issue that could threaten the union of our then very young nation and Jefferson believed that for our union to hold together that an appeasement or compromise on the issue would be necessary for the nation to survive the challenges facing it.

This compromise became reality in the Constitutional Convention of 1787 with the Three Fifths Compromise. Which allowed for 3 out of 5 slaves to be counted as 1 person toward the population of each state for the purpose of determining it's representation in the House. The effect of which was to give the "southern states a third more seats in Congress and a third more electoral votes than if slaves had been ignored, but fewer than if slaves and free persons had been counted equally, thus allowing the slaveholder interests to largely dominate the government of the United States until 1861" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Fifths_Compromise

Now that would appear to a shameful chapter in our nation's history and on a certain level it was indeed shameful. But the reality is that without that compromise there would almost certainly not be a United States of America now. Many of our founding fathers, including Jefferson would go on later in their lives express their clear disdain for the practice and the industry of slavery. But there was the business of founding a nation that could survive that had to come first before we would be able to move on to becoming our better selves. And that is what those golden words in our Declaration of Independence and Constitution were really about. Which is not what we were at that particular juncture in time. But instead what we could and should become and continuously strive to become. That was the American experiment and it continues on till this day in our constant if sometimes stumbling march forward to becoming our better selves in the hope that one day we can say we fulfilled the greater promises of our forefathers to betterment of not only ourselves. but for the rest of the world as well.
 
Last edited:
So, the rapist, murderers, kidnappers, child molesters, and other criminals are being stigmatized for breaking the law to enter our country illegally?

I am all tore up.

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk

With an attitude like that I wouldn't be at all surprised that if you were to have been born in a different time and place. Say 1930s Germany. Where of one of Hitler's fascism tenets was persecution and stigmatization of minorities by casting them as the 'other' to be blamed for all the past failings of the state and deemed as being criminals and enemies of the state. That you probably would've blindly and gladly swap out that Screaming Eagle for this;

main-qimg-15752243043b97039960d1530ac464e6-c.jpg
 
Last edited:
If you're defending people breaking our laws to come here, then you obviously don't have the first clue about what this country's founding principles are...sad, public education.

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk

First off do you even know what the laws are? It's estimated that 2/3 of the 'illegal' or 'undocumented' immigrants came into this country legally via temporary work visas and didn't return to their countries of origin when the visa expired. Overstaying a visa is a civil offense. Not a criminal offense. And the claim that immigrants bring with them increased crime is a myth. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/30/upshot/crime-immigration-myth.html

This analysis is one of the most comprehensive longitudinal studies of the local immigrant-crime relationship. It spans decades of metropolitan area data, incorporating places with widely differing social, cultural and economic backgrounds, and a broad range of types of violent crime.

Areas were chosen to reflect a range of immigrant composition, from Wheeling, W.Va., where one in 100 people was born outside the United States, to Miami, where every second person was. Some areas were home to newly formed immigrant communities; other immigrant pockets went back generations. Controlling for population characteristics, unemployment rates and other socioeconomic conditions, the researchers still found that, on average, as immigration increases in American metropolises, crime decreases.

The foreign-born data, which is collected through the census, most likely undercounts the numbers of undocumented immigrants, many of whom might wish to avoid the risk of identifying themselves. They are, however, at least partly represented in the overall foreign-born population counts.

This is not the only study showing that immigration does not increase crime. A broad survey released in January examined years of research on the immigrant-crime connection, concluding that an overwhelming majority of studies found either no relationship between the two or a beneficial one, in which immigrant communities bring economic and cultural revitalization to the neighborhoods they join.
 
Last edited:


Williams was a former co-chair of President Donald Trump's campaign in Georgia. The senator describes himself as "anti-political correctness, anti-liberal, anti-establishment, and pro-Georgia."

I see this as a smart move. There is a lot Millennials(such as myself) that do not share this sense of collective white guilt, which a lot of libtards( aka hard leftist: most regressives and neo- Marxist SJW's) unnecessarily feel the need to bear and we're tired of the PC culture that resulted from their retardation. So his message appeals to a lot of younger people.

snip
According to his emails, Williams is a big supporter of the federal 287 (g) immigration program, which allows local and state law enforcement to work together with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to arrest undocumented immigrants based on criminal charges unrelated to immigration.

So when you read “Danger! Murderers, rapists, kidnappers, child molesters and other criminals on board.” (illegal immigration is a crime) it means just that.

The ironic thing is a lot of older people offended by this, are the ones that would laugh at old conservatives for spreging out over offensive lyrics in music and violence in video games during the 90's

Is this what the GOP really wants to become?

With the influx of young brash voters idk if they have much of a choice.
"Can't fight against the youth, 'cuz we're strong. Them are rude, rude people."
 
Williams was a former co-chair of President Donald Trump's campaign in Georgia. The senator describes himself as "anti-political correctness, anti-liberal, anti-establishment, and pro-Georgia."

I see this as a smart move. There is a lot Millennials(such as myself) that do not share this sense of collective white guilt, which a lot of libtards( aka hard leftist: most regressives and neo- Marxist SJW's) unnecessarily feel the need to bear and we're tired of the PC culture that resulted from their retardation. So his message appeals to a lot of younger people.

snip
According to his emails, Williams is a big supporter of the federal 287 (g) immigration program, which allows local and state law enforcement to work together with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to arrest undocumented immigrants based on criminal charges unrelated to immigration.

So when you read “Danger! Murderers, rapists, kidnappers, child molesters and other criminals on board.” (illegal immigration is a crime) it means just that.

The ironic thing is a lot of older people offended by this, are the ones that would laugh at old conservatives for spreging out over offensive lyrics in music and violence in video games during the 90's



With the influx of young brash voters idk if they have much of a choice.
"Can't fight against the youth, 'cuz we're strong. Them are rude, rude people."

just more, right wing socialism on a national basis. We already have a Second Amendment and should have, no security problems in our free States.
 

snip
Williams criticized the move in a statement, calling YouTube "the latest liberal California company stifling conservative free speech to appease the hard-left."

Considering there are a lot of Neo-Marxist in this commie ****hole that want to bring a end to "White Supremacy". (aka commie newspeak for a white majority running the government" I could see how this would really piss them off.

snip
"Perhaps YouTube's executives would like to move their families into an area that has been destroyed by illegals. It might give them perspective."

I was born and raised in a heavily diverse/low income part of the San Fernando Valley. I can attest that to that, It really does change your perspective.
 
Williams was a former co-chair of President Donald Trump's campaign in Georgia. The senator describes himself as "anti-political correctness, anti-liberal, anti-establishment, and pro-Georgia."

I see this as a smart move. There is a lot Millennials(such as myself) that do not share this sense of collective white guilt, which a lot of libtards( aka hard leftist: most regressives and neo- Marxist SJW's) unnecessarily feel the need to bear and we're tired of the PC culture that resulted from their retardation. So his message appeals to a lot of younger people.

snip
According to his emails, Williams is a big supporter of the federal 287 (g) immigration program, which allows local and state law enforcement to work together with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to arrest undocumented immigrants based on criminal charges unrelated to immigration.

So when you read “Danger! Murderers, rapists, kidnappers, child molesters and other criminals on board.” (illegal immigration is a crime) it means just that.

The ironic thing is a lot of older people offended by this, are the ones that would laugh at old conservatives for spreging out over offensive lyrics in music and violence in video games during the 90's



With the influx of young brash voters idk if they have much of a choice.
"Can't fight against the youth, 'cuz we're strong. Them are rude, rude people."

Sorry I'm not buying that at all. Surveys done about Millennials show them to be predominantly to be more progressive and liberal than their parents. Those young folks that aren't offended by that Senator's sign simply aren't educated enough yet to know better.
 
If they have committed no other crime than coming here illegally, yes I am against deporting those people.

If people want to come to our country to work and contribute to our society I have no issues with them and would be against deporting those people. Some of our main problems here are not securing our borders and properly vetting the people coming in.

But let's not go down the "broken our laws" road because I am pretty sure there are more than a few laws you don't mind being broken.

I was specific in mentioning murders, rapists, etc.
 
Sorry I'm not buying that at all. Surveys done about Millennials show them to be predominantly to be more progressive and liberal than their parents.

Link? I would like to see how they gather the data. I've heard this before and don't doubt it but there is a lot more of us then you think.



Those young folks that aren't offended by that Senator's sign simply aren't educated enough yet to know better.

:lamo Keep telling yourself that comrade.
 
Don't believe in Capitalism, right wingers? nothing but socialism on a national basis, is all y'all seem to know.

Ah you're trying to insinuate that I am a National socialist. Swing and a miss cupcake, care to try again.

read it yourself. it clearly states what is necessary to the security of a free State.

Irrelevant to the topic.
 
Link? I would like to see how they gather the data. I've heard this before and don't doubt it but there is a lot more of us then you think.

Yeah sure, ok. :roll:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/03/new-survey-young-staying-liberal-conservatives-dying-off.html

For obvious reasons, the broadly liberal demographic trends in American politics have received much less attention since the 2016 election. Yet the fact remains that America is politically sorted by generations in a way it never has before. The oldest voters are the most conservative, white, and Republican, and the youngest voters the most liberal, racially diverse, and Democratic. There is absolutely no sign the dynamic is abating during the Trump years. If anything, it is accelerating.

The most recent Pew Research Survey has more detail about the generational divide. It shows that the old saw that young people would naturally grow more conservative as they age, or that their Democratic loyalties were an idiosyncratic response to Barack Obama’s unique personal appeal, has not held. Younger voters have distinctly more liberal views than older voters:
 
You want to talk about silly observations. You just basically said that this nation was founded upon establishment of white christian supremacy. So then, if that what we were? Is that what is we should remain? The man credited with writing that most famous and elegant phrase in our Declaration of Independence; "We believe that all men are created equal" was a white slave owner from Virginia named Thomas Jefferson. But I think we would be wrong in assuming that he wasn't aware of the inherent hypocrisy of what he wrote. Jefferson's relationship with slavery was a complex one. While he did own many slaves, many of them inherited, he worked passionately, albeit quietly, behind the scenes to bring the practice of slavery to an end. That is not to say that Jefferson was not a racist. He definitely was one. He believed that the black slaves were inherently inferior "in mind and body" and would never be able to make the successful transformation to becoming 'freemen' in this country because they were not intellectually equipped to be able to do so.

Jefferson's voice on slavery went largely silent in the late 1780s and 1790s. Likewise when it came to what to do about the Indians Jefferson didn't appear to have any answer for it. Jefferson was also forced to come to the realization through his enormous debt being primarily offset by the wealth associated with his owning of slaves. Which were a valued property asset just like any other business or personal asset of the time. That he could reasonably suspect that such was probably the case with many southern slave owners and for the South in general whose economy relied heavily on slave labor. Also many in South were fearful that continued talk of the immorality of slavery would lead to slave revolts. This Jefferson knew was an issue that could threaten the union of our then very young nation and Jefferson believed that for our union to hold together that an appeasement or compromise on the issue would be necessary for the nation to survive the challenges facing it.

This compromise became reality in the Constitutional Convention of 1787 with the Three Fifths Compromise. Which allowed for 3 out of 5 slaves to be counted as 1 person toward the population of each state for the purpose of determining it's representation in the House. The effect of which was to give the "southern states a third more seats in Congress and a third more electoral votes than if slaves had been ignored, but fewer than if slaves and free persons had been counted equally, thus allowing the slaveholder interests to largely dominate the government of the United States until 1861" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Fifths_Compromise

Now that would appear to a shameful chapter in our nation's history and on a certain level it was indeed shameful. But the reality is that without that compromise there would almost certainly not be a United States of America now. Many of our founding fathers, including Jefferson would go on later in their lives express their clear disdain for the practice and the industry of slavery. But there was the business of founding a nation that could survive that had to come first before we would be able to move on to becoming our better selves. And that is what those golden words in our Declaration of Independence and Constitution were really about. Which is not what we were at that particular juncture in time. But instead what we could and should become and continuously strive to become. That was the American experiment and it continues on till this day in our constant if sometimes stumbling march forward to becoming our better selves in the hope that one day we can say we fulfilled the greater promises of our forefathers to betterment of not only ourselves. but for the rest of the world as well.

That's quite a response, so when did diversity & multi-culturism become national treasures because they certainly were not as
I alluded to in colonial times nor in the times of the founders!

History will not look back favorably at late 20th century Americans who felt the great republic they inherited would be enriched by
bnringing in millions legal & illegal from the failed states of the 3rd world.
 
That's quite a response, so when did diversity & multi-culturism become national treasures because they certainly were not as
I alluded to in colonial times nor in the times of the founders!

History will not look back favorably at late 20th century Americans who felt the great republic they inherited would be enriched by
bnringing in millions legal & illegal from the failed states of the 3rd world.

You do know that the people of colonial America and our founding fathers hailed from Europe don't you? So I suspect that they may have known just a little something about multiculturalism even though they would never have thought to call it that. Also the 20th century world saw the rise of this nation to being the preeminent superpower in all the world. A nation built by immigrants. And so if historians will unfavorably look back at anything about this great republic of ours in the late 20th century and the beginning of this one it will be that America at one point decided to turn inward and away from the rest of the world. Thus dimming, hopefully just briefly, the beacon of hope and freedom that it had always shone out to rest of world at a time when it's leadership in the world was very needed.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom