I hard someone make a distinction I had not drawn…and I have to admit that they have a point.I had pointed out that it’s not wrong to want the very best people coming to our country–even if, at the same time, we also offer some degree of refuge for those who come from countries that, for the most part, are deeply troubled countries. I think everyone, even pastors, likely want very good people to come to their churches. By that I don’t mean we want already saved folks, but rather that we don’t want fruitcakes, pastor-killers, etc. Fair enough?Well, I heard a guy on CNN make the point that there’s nothing wrong with America wanting, say, engineers to come to our country. But what we should mean by that is engineers from ANY country–even those blankety-blank countries. He said that he felt that that making it about engineers (or people) from only certainly countries was racist.I think he had a point. At the same time, I think a nation can get such a bad reputation for itself that, indeed, we tend to lump everyone–even the best of the bunch–into a group to which we attach all sorts of negative stereotypes. It’s about like saying that an engineer from Jordan is a terrorist, when that person might be one of the most decent folks on earth.Likewise, because so many black nations tend to have considerable turmoil and the such, we can make similar assumptions that are unfair. I do not think that Trump meant to make such a point. I think he was simply pointing out that nations that are in such turmoil OBVIOUSLY have plenty of folks with a strong incentive to want to come here–even if they have nothing to offer.
But what did he actually say? Do we know? Do we take the word of a known liar like Durbin________________
Aaron has some good points. for many years immigrants for the most percentage had to have a skill or money to establish a business. There have always been humanitarian immigrants, but not all .
But what did he actually say? Do we know? Do we take the word of a known liar like Durbin? Resident, I support Trump’s presidency over a Hillary presidency, but we are not well-served if we act like he can’t be a total jerk. I mean, we already KNOW that he says the grab ’em… line. That right there tells you the type of person we are dealing with–a very coarse one.I know he’s a billionaire, and that likely has given him the leeway to pretty much insult anyone, say anything, etc., and not really get hurt by it. Here’s why I think he said it though…. First, it’s not at all out of line with his coarseness.Second, it’s not at all out of line with his general type of thinking about immigration. I don’t believe he meant it as a racist statement, but it was instead a rather hurtful generalization along the lines of bad people tend to come from bad countries.
How exactly is bringing in engineers with far lower wage expectations to compete with Americans America first? Just asking as an engineer who hasn’t got a pay raise in 10 years because of the foreign competition both abroad and at home.Further to that point, how is taking the best and brightest out of poor countries a good thing? Does that somehow make the rest of those people who can’t get out better off because they lost the best and brightest?
This is, by definition, prejudice________________I’m not saved because I’m good. I’m saved because He’s good!My website: http://www.bradfreeman.comMy blog: bradcfreeman.tumblr.com/
This is, by definition, prejudice. I’m very prejudiced against all Muslims. I love them as people, and would never mistreat any. But as far as being allowed to come here, it was a huge mistake letting them.Then again, prejudice is something not based on reason. Thus, I guess prejudiced is not the way to describe my feelings towards Muslims as they are indeed based on reason________________
But what did he actually say? Do we know? Do we take the word of a known liar like Durbin? Resident, I support Trump’s presidency over a Hillary presidency, but we are not well-served if we act like he can’t be a total jerk. I mean, we already KNOW that he says the grab ’em… line. That right there tells you the type of person we are dealing with–a very coarse one.I know he’s a billionaire, and that likely has given him the leeway to pretty much insult anyone, say anything, etc., and not really get hurt by it. Here’s why I think he said it though…. First, it’s not at all out of line with his coarseness.Second, it’s not at all out of line with his general type of thinking about immigration. I don’t believe he meant it as a racist statement, but it was instead a rather hurtful generalization along the lines of bad people tend to come from bad countries. Third, and this one is the kicker, WHO IN THE WORLD can’t recall if someone says something as inflammatory as that??? Yes, the Democrats would lie in a minute to hurt Trump–and I have no doubt that many have. But let’s not act like GOP (God’s Own Party!) wouldn’t also lie through their teeth (but in a way that won’t get them in trouble for lying) by claiming I don’t recall. If they can’t recall something that soon from a meeting, then they are the ones with mental issues, not Trump.
Very good comment JD, it is a different time than the 1800-early 1900’s when They needed freedom and a future and we needed people, workers and folks with dreams. There comes a time it would be good to look back at a speech made in England by a politician what he forsaw in England’s future if they did not get a handle on immigration. It was labled the ‘River of Blood Speech’ many years ago, now what he predicted appears to be coming to pass. ________________Some facts but mostly just my [email protected]/
Trump is trying to change our immigration system – to not allow the uneducated and unemployable to be the lion’s share of immigration.When he saw that had not been addressed – he asked why we needed so many from countries that can’t help America – because let’s face it – if you are unemployable – you and your children become a burden to our Welfare system – which, based on our debt, is not really an option anymore.Yes – some can get the opportunity – but there is a limit to how many we can take.Trump is trying to delineate those numbers.He used inflammatory language when the problem is a serious one that should have had sober discussions regarding how to solve them________________
All you have to do is look across the pond to see some of Europe with weak/no immigration plans to see what our problem is going to be in a few years.I just read of problems in the UK with the universal health care, many long time citizens ‘wait’ for beds. One friend had to drive 75-90 KM to see his sick mum, it was the nearest bed.Surely it can be seen we do need some strong ‘Enforced’ immigration controls.________________Some facts but mostly just my [email protected]/
Again, there is no disagreement that the discussion got heated. Nobody is denying that. What is being disputed needlessly is what exactly Trump said in the heated discussion. But let’s not forget WHY the discussion got heated to begin with. The proposal given to Trump by the gang of 6 was a total joke, an insulting piece of legislation that did nothing to achieve the ends demanded by those who voted for Trump. It rightfully made the President angry, and I’m glad he stood up to them. But what does Durban do? Does he try to resolve the conflict? Does he address valid concerns of a large segment of the populace? NO! He uses the occasion to bring forth false charges of racism against Trump.Your criticism against Trump is grossly misplaced. The one in the meeting using inflammatory language was Durban, who focused in on how terms like chain migration might remind someone of slavery (which is one of the most ignorant things I’ve ever heard) instead of dealing with the real issue________________
The accusation is that Trump called these countries of origin s—hole countries.Today, Senator Cotton said he did not hear Trump use that term about individuals or about persons. Cotton is a lawyer, and that Clintonian parsing would make the best (or worst) of ’em proud. You’re necessarily saying it about individuals and persons if you say it about someone’s country, in my opinion, but the specific report is that Trump called countries s—holes, not any individual or person.Cotton’s Clintonian parsing is another nail in the coffin. Trump said it. Let’s move on.hotair.com/archives/2018/01/15/tom-cotton-shtholegate-didnt-hear-trump-use-derogatory-language-individuals-persons/
That’s a totally reasonable disagreement. I think if I made a post about what a s—hole the South is with a bunch of statistics about literacy, poverty, education, economic output, welfare utilization, income, etc. posters here would take it really personally. That’s all I’m saying. My post could still be interpreted as you said as a criticism of the government, but who voted for the government? That defense only works for places where the government is not democratically elected, which it is in Haiti and a lot of places in Africa. But I certainly think it’s reasonable to disagree.
Aaron said:….. Third, and this one is the kicker, WHO IN THE WORLD can’t recall