Build That Wall!!
- Thread starter BYE
- Start date
Clearly, the wall is a symbolic wall.
cost-effective solution is build a freeway and then redirect traffic with the technology we use in road construction projects. Ain't nobody gonna want to wait for the pilot vehicle. They'd be getting out and hiking home.
lol. I've been running into a lot of road projects lately......
If the gov gave me the job of educating them, they'd be turned into Republicans and Obama would have his shorts in a bunch to build that wall. And they'd be sneaking back home in the dead of night to cut class.......
cost-effective solution is build a freeway and then redirect traffic with the technology we use in road construction projects. Ain't nobody gonna want to wait for the pilot vehicle. They'd be getting out and hiking home.
lol. I've been running into a lot of road projects lately......
If the gov gave me the job of educating them, they'd be turned into Republicans and Obama would have his shorts in a bunch to build that wall. And they'd be sneaking back home in the dead of night to cut class.......
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
Clearly
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
There is nothing clear about that post. Have you been sniffing glue?
addictionary
Well-Known Member
Do you remember my reply to the "small achievements for the Jazz" thread? So far we have already seen JGolds and JJAS. This is going nice. Welcome back.
Many people, including Clinton and Obama were pro-fortification along the borders around ten years ago, and all presidential candidates should be for securing our borders to some extent. Both Clinton and Obama are both much more nuanced in their thinking, unlike orangutan. Furthermore, it's not just the wall; it's once again his delusion. Not sure why you included the videos. Hilary's thinking is light years ahead of Trump's in it's nuance. Oh, here's the "but..." after the clip you included.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wjbil4MAfM
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
why? How? At what cost? At what consequence?
I don't find it to be nuanced, I find it to be cruel. Sending back Guatemalan child refugees to a country that much of its violence is due to our war on drugs and our active support of a coup isn't nuance, it's ****ed up.
She touches on many of the facets of immigration in that brief clip. The issue is extremely complex. I didn't hear her say what you're implying at all. Is she running on a platform to send Guatemalan refugees back? I'm sure she's seen Al Norte.
Much of the logic that I'm reading behind your thinking (actually or not) is why Sanders was much too extreme for many people other than millennials. In certain ways, he was as delusional as Trump. He had some good goals but had precious little insight when it came to how we would actually carry it out. Millennials love the talk, but most have no idea how to accomplish this crap. Millennials are hugely important to our evolving identity, but they are at times so optimistic that they miss what's in front of them.
When it comes to immigration, there are a whole slew of issues:
1) How do we treat refugees from around the world?
2) What is the effect on our economy?
3) What is a refugee?
4) What is the responsibility of countries like Canada and Mexico with refugees? Canada's exemplary in this issue.
5) Who do we accept, and who do we send back? Should it be a free for all?
6) How do we incorporate the illegals who have more or less naturalized and how does the message from our actions affect future illegal immigration?
7) Are any forms of border control effective, and if so, which ones are the most cost effective?
8) What are Americans willing to sacrifice? Will they bring refugees into their own homes, etc.?
The list goes on and on, and we need realists here, not delusionists.
I wish Oliver would fill The Nightly Show's open timeslot. I think he is one of the few people who can replace Cobert/Stewart.
Sent from my *** using Jazzfanz mobile app
Sent from my *** using Jazzfanz mobile app
I like what he's doing right now just as much myself. It was kind of a mass exodus from the Daily Show around the time that Stewart left. They lost Stewart, Colbert, and Oliver around the same time. Trevor's pretty good and getting better on the Daily Show. Not really a fan of the Nightly Show as much.
Nightly Show got cancelled. Wilmore was funny but his correspondents sucked and his roundtable segments were awful.
Olivers HBO show is cool but its only once a week.
Sent from my *** using Jazzfanz mobile app
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
She didn't have to say it. That's what they did.
Pay attention bro.
PS. She also said it. You wanna look for the clip go ahead, either way it doesn't matter what she said because what actually happened is more relevant. Border control has serious consequences and there is no moral justification for it. Thank god your family wasn't turned back, eh?
1)Like people looking for a better life
2)Very good. (Shouldn't be part of the equation when facing a moral choice anyway, but still it's very good for our economy)
3)Who ****in cares? They want to come. Who are you to stop them? Does being born here really give you that authority?
4)Who ****in cares? We're not talking about Canada's policy.
5)yeah, it should be a free for all.
6)Give em a visa. If they are here long enough and want citizenship let them apply. Hopefully in the future immigration won't be illegal in the first place.
7)I'm against all forms of excluding people from crossing imaginary lines. Cuz I'm not 5
8)We won't need to sacrifice. Their presence will make our lives better, our economy stronger, our experiences richer.
Your list is trumpy
Last edited:
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
So in other words you are going to be taking an unlimited number of refugees into your home? That's very admirable. I'm not as good a person as you.
Not into his personal home, I hope. That would be awfully crowded. By I agree with alt13. Let the everyone live and work anywhere they like.
Not sure what I'm supposed to say about all of this. It's Pollyanna to say the least and smacks of a fifth grader running for class president. My list was all questions. I said nothing as to my opinion on them, and I'm not sure how legitimate questions that have been around for a long, long time are "Trumpy." I can tell that you're passionate about your answers for whatever reason.
Clinton addressed who was actually immigrating, i.e., folks from Central and South America, which would include Guatemala. Not sure who "they" are when you say that's what they did. Border patrols, politicians, Democrats, Republicans, “the Government,” the Mexican government? Who's responsible?
Essentially your stance is that we should allow everyone and anyone to enter the country, and we should simply disavow any idea of borders (imaginary lines), i.e., possession of land and demarcation of property because only a five-year-old child would do this?
For what country would you "give them a visa" then, since it would seem that without real borders (imaginary ones) what would demarcate our country? Would this be an American ideology that unites us and frees us from the shackles of borders of substance? If we have open borders, then why even have visas.
I can definitely empathize with families who are fleeing war and violence and hope that we and other nations will do our part to accept them into our country.
The situation is nowhere near as simple as you make it out to be and ignores a host of complications and implications. Notice, I didn't say a thing about how I would address the issues. I simply raised some of the issues. If your answer is to simply open the borders and let things take care of themselves, then I don't have the time to even continue this discussion because the issues involved are too many to mention, and the laziness, based off of “moral” grounds, to simply say “open up the imaginary borders” does almost everyone a disservice and solves nothing.
I normally agree with most everything you say, Siro, but this seems awfully simplistic. Should we let anyone (not just immigrants) live in your car, live on your lawn, or open up a nudy magazine stand in front of an elementary school? We have a collective identity demarcated by geography. Borders exist at every level, as does our cultural concept of space (not outer space). I don't walk into my neighbors house and grab some milk for my cereal. I respect his/her space and privacy. Does this not exist on our real and legal geographical borders?
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
I thought that was what question 8 was suggesting. Regardless, you're both much more compassionate than me. I agree that immigration is good, but I think rules and borders are essential.