« Ten and no change | Main | Kooks and Kochs try to derail south Phoenix light rail »

June 17, 2018

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Is this kind of evil inhumanity--where the conservatives' hallowed(?) "law" is used as political brinkmanship by tearing apart families--what "One Nation Under God" and "In God We Trust" is about "in practice?"

Is this kind of vile and indifferent "ugly americanism" what we want the world to define our "shining light on the hill" nation by?

If this political spectacle engineered by trump, "Schutzstaffel" stephen miller, jeff seSSions, and their republi-klans offends you to your very humanistic and caring core, please take that emotional distress with you into the voting booth in November.

Is this the face of America we want to display to the world?

Ok, I have immense sympathy for those folks trying to improve their lives, but still, how much of Latin America needs to move here?

Ok, so if we instead automatically presume to reject their asylum petitions, why even take anyone into custody?

Further, big brother will be complete within ten years, so living here as a virtual serf is going to be nearly impossible in the near future- yet we persist in assuming there will be a sufficient amount of dog jobs for these newly immigrated unskilled people.

Teenage employment is now at record lows because those jobs are now filled with permanent people living in crowded conditions because the wages are so low.

So now, our own poor people are being systematically devastated by immigrants who bring literally nothing new to the table.

Yeah, wasn't Trump enough? What the frick is going to happen when you get a democratic populist?

As I stated last time you went down this rabbit hole, the democratic party had better start understanding how angry the entire lower half of the economic structure is getting with this immigration pipeline of perpetual population increase.

And everyone is excoriating Stringer- he is just Captain Obvious, but the reality is still what he said.

Concern Troll, as I've said before in this column, the Anglos created the impression among the Mexicans (which obviously percolated to Central America) that America was the land of opportunity--because the Anglos paid the migrants in dolares Americanos.

The Anglos also created the global warming which finds its proof here in America with the Southwest migrations to Oregon and Washington state. Want to be it isn't happening further South?

Insofar as the poor Americans being displaced by the illegals, why don't you ask those paying the illegals why they are doing it? I think you know the answer, and its the hallowed profit motive inherent to capitalism.

You state, "As I stated last time you went down this rabbit hole, the democratic party had better start understanding how angry the entire lower half of the economic structure is getting with this immigration pipeline of perpetual population increase."

Maybe, Concern Troll, you and your entire lower half of the economic structure might want to ask the Republican party that same question as well, since the middle class is being squeezed by the concentration of wealth at the top tier AND being squeezed by the concentration of workers this wealth concentration often employs in their workplaces, yards, construction sites, and restaurants.

Concern Troll, There is also the demand by Americans for drugs--and the Mexicans and Central/South Americans who fill that demand also create the impression of America as the land of opportunity. Their compadres and familias get the message--and act on it by coming North--especially when things get violent.

I worry about two interconnected things here. The most pressing concern is the debacle of Trumpism, very possibly an extinction level event for our democracy. Is it happening before our disbelieving eyes in real time.

The second is what Rogue is alluding to, a kind of demographic tsunami in which waves of wretched humanity start pounding our gates seeking refuge. They'll work for virtually nothing if we let them in but they'll also bring their broken English and dusky skin. This quandary is a subset of Lifeboat Ethics 101 and it, too, is happening in real time.

Thomas Friedman loves the trope that the world we have to live in is flat now. Globalization has consequences many of which are alarming if you're used to things being a certain way. This is the world many not only reject but are actively seeking to sabotage, from Donald Trump to your next-door neighbor with a closet full of guns.

Liberals see the connections and, as a consequence, empathize with the afflicted and distressed. But we're only human and we tribalize in the typical ways humans are wont to do. I'm better than you are! You're a racist! Jesus said to suffer the little children! We persuade a few Republican women in the tonier suburbs but not many others.

The rightward retreat of advanced democracies is a warning light we can easily see but still deny. Our fear and outrage become bulwarks against the deeper realization that no one is an island anymore. The world is now a homeless vagrant living on our doorstep and screaming at us when step outside. Do we call the police or bring him a meal? How you answer is what we're discussing here.

As someone who lives in a blue bubble in a very white city, I have a preferred answer. But unless that answer is shared by a majority, it likely won't win the day. Chances are I will necessarily have to compromise my values because democracy is not a panacea. There are no magical solutions, just the endless churn of argument and anger. Whoever you are and wherever you go will only take you deeper into the heart of this inescapable conundrum.

I point out the inescapable economic consequences and get labeled a Republican- guess I should ask DD if I is one of them- the basilisk look of contempt will be the answer to that one.

The lifeboat economics equation is the valid one, because we do need to decide how it is compatible with destroying the bottom of the social safety net.

So, live above the mean you will think everything is great, while we import the next generation of unpapered serfs.

There will be no question of equity in the future, but one of survival.

And the survival of our democracy is first up on the block- and it will fail because the people who have a lot of money will like the ability to have serfs.

Now, how does that square with democrat or republican? The question of how we get back to serfdom.

Funny thing, unions are pretty much dead. Mass organization is pretty much dead.

So now we get this mass of special interests capturing parts of the political party, yet nobody wants to look at the consequences of the past decisions and decide change is necessary.

Down the rabbit hole we go.

Like some of the older commenters, I plan on eating some popcorn and watching how this plays out.

I reject the premise that we can't absorb the immigrants or leverage them to our advantage. There is a construction labor shortage in many cities across the nation - in some cases significantly holding back the "back to the city movement".

I think a root cause problem / solution lies in the agriculture sector. If we reformed the factory farming industry and shifting subsidies away from it and toward more sustainable practices (small organic farms), three things would happen.

1. Latin American agriculture would be restored to living wages as there would be far less dumping of cheap, subsidized American food on their economies, reducing immigration to the U.S.

2. A huge demand for agricultural workers would be unleashed in the U.S., as small organic farming is much more labor intensive, requiring much more immigration from latin america.

3. The U.S. population would end up becoming healthier, less polluting, and be more prepared for the agricultural impacts from climate change.

Also, I find John's statement of breaking up families as being "shrewd" (e.g. effective)as troubling and disappointing. Another reason why Christianity is becoming less and less popular in this country. If that is representative of the ethics, morality, and character that churches are teaching, I'll pass, and so will my son.

The US is doing nothing substantial to prepare for the automation of great swaths of jobs. We look the other way when it comes to climate change, if not denying it outright. And we want cheap goods and services. The ensuing anxiety is palpable everywhere these days, but in true American fashion, it's vented on the powerless. Kiss up, kick down. Same as it ever was.

I also find this statement:

"Can the United States continue to absorb 1 million legal immigrants every year, plus illegals, and remain the United States?"

As inherently racist (probably unintentionally but racist still).

What does this mean? The U.S. by definition is a nation of immigrants, so what are you saying here? Do you have any data or facts to support this or have you been influenced by Fox News propaganda?

As a % of population immigration today is about average as it has been since 1850 (and lower that it was for the decades around the turn of the 20th century)

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/immigrant-population-over-time

With me being labeled a "racist" even by a friend of the blog, I'll offer this from the other side. That side exists and must be defeated electorally, not just in the blue bubble:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/illegal-immigration-enforcement-separating-kids-at-border/

Yes, Diane, we are preparing, through inertia.

The Trump administration is by definition odious, but they are simply enforcing as Jon points out, the laws as they currently exist.

Further, immigration is starting to be immensely disruptive to the political party system, as I pointed out below.

Our shredded social safety net is one consequence, because business doesn't care about anything but the bottom line.

And immigrants keep wages depressed, period. Keep on bringing in H1B visa folks and IT begins to really fall behind in wages- and guess what has happened!!!

Look, call me racist, but controlling who is supposed to be here, and controlling access to the poverty programs provides some element of control of the costs, period.

Otherwise, the old folks are going to vote everyone else off the island until they die. And that means your kids pay exorbitant costs for education- have no ladder jobs, and face ridiculous costs of housing.

So, more expensive healthcare, and personal care for the elderly, and lower house prices. That plus higher wages for the young would work by closing off the immigration flood. Or look at Eastern Europe, which is already essentially succeeding from the EU, or Merkel about to be fired over this stuff.

Put the racism away. The sheer number of houses being bought by tourists alone would stun you in California, plus "students".

Ask Vancouver if it is racism or simply being drowned in other people's money, while the society begins to fray.


Then the biggest bogey in the room, total identification. That will make first class citizens versus the grey docs, versus the folks working down in the sweatshops and Filiberto kitchens.

And it ain't just here- just look at China and their residency system, and now their social credit system.

It ain't just farm workers, and it isn't going to change until it is either constructively solved, or violently solved.

The status quo is going to break the system.

Well, friends don't let friends say racist shit. I'll admit that I was emotionally triggered when I saw the image you used for this post. I was expecting to read a condemnation and I was (and still am) very disappointed in what I read instead. That said, I shouldn't have attacked your religion as part of my point. I apologize, that was childish.

As far as calling you a racist, I didn't. You can say racist things and not be a racist. I only know you through your writing, and based on that, I don't think you are a racist. But, we white people need to be self-aware and hold each other accountable when racist thinking presents itself.

I read the article you linked to and it's basically an op-ed in disguise. It's written like real news but littered with the author's Trump apologist stance. It says things like "very briefly detained" and "minimal separation" but never actually says a number. It's 20 days, on average.

U.S. border policy has long been deeply immoral. Border walls were strategically placed to funnel immigrants to their deaths in the desert. Ruthlessly, the government even predicted deaths as part of their policy evaluation "logic model" that used data indicators to track success (more deaths = policy was working). I don't think it's an overstatement to say that this sounds something Nazi Germany would do. This is all public record if it sounds incredible.

What's new is that this brutal "deterrence" policy is now abusing children. Think about that. U.S. policy is child abuse. That's not only my view but the official position of the American Academy of Pediatrics. You have to be a real monster to hurt children. What have we become?

Ex Phoenix Planner, your thoughtful comments always enrich Rogue.

Spewing cheap outrage would have been easy. But it's everywhere out there among "right-thinking people."

My intention was to get us thinking outside the bubble. For one thing, there's a powerful opposition — "racist" though it may be — that must be understood to be defeated. Second, what's our plan for a planet with potentially hundreds of millions on the move in the future?

We need to be investing heavily in making their countries stable and habitable. Empowering women's reproductive choices in developing nations would be another constructive avenue.

Merely joining the meme of Outrage Culture may not even win elections, especially with gerrymandering backed by the McConnell Supreme Court, vote suppression, and the Kremlin helping the other side.

Separating families.
Nothing new here in USA History and world history.

https://www.propublica.org/article/children-separated-from-parents-border-patrol-cbp-trump-immigration-policy
and
Coyote capitalism and moving millions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buQvL1CTT98

I, too, read Rich Lowry's piece. I'm not qualified to vet its accuracy, so I won't pass judgment here. That said, Lowry was a Never Trumper until sometime last year. Now, he's a cheerleader. You will notice that nowhere does he even breathe a suggestion that Trump might be held to account for brazenly lying about his own policy. Trump keeps saying Democrats are to blame for passing some "law" where the fact is plain this policy to separate the children from parents was his own, and according to Stephen Miller, designed to inflict maximal emotional pain on migrants and their children in order to serve as a deterrent. Trump, in other words, is a monster.

The issue is difficult politically because human beings are tribalistic by nature. Trump knows he has a winning issue here because it mobilizes his racist base and even appeals to some "moderates". We must, for that reason, bear witness to a greater moral imperative: you never intentionally harm a child under any circumstances. What Rich Lowry wrote was horrifying for that reason. He essentially whitewashed a grave crime against children for no better reason than supporting the toxic personality cult that is the Trump presidency.

I fully agree with Rogue's tweaking of the Outrage Culture but it doesn't occur in a vacuum. As dispiriting as it is to see Social Justice Warriors playing an emotional blackmail card on their various issues, the larger problem is a Culture War designed to inflame racial hysteria. America is rapidly changing. Liberals didn't invent globalization or the population explosion. These things happened when when we were still busy creating the Big Bright Tomorrow of fast cars and suburban housing pods. If Republicans were patriots, they would stop picking these scabs. They won't because it wins elections for them even though it damages America in the bargain. If and when liberals intentionally damage the nation this way, I'll separate myself from the only political tradition still carrying the torch of our founding ideals.

Well said, soleri.

We are the richest country the world has ever seen.

And yet we always plead poverty when it comes to helping our people.

Can't afford healthcare for all. Can't afford free public college for everyone who desires it.

Can't afford a liveable minimum wage.

Can't afford maternity leave. Can't afford to house our homeless. Can't afford renewable energy. Can't afford high speed rail.

Can't afford this; can't afford that.

Sorry folks. There's no money for anything--except toys for the military, bailouts for big banks and Wall Street, and tax cuts for the rich. Oh, and prisons. Can always afford more prisons.

The budget for the SNAP (food stamp) program is $71 billion a year. It helps over 40 million people a year. The cost of the F-35 is $406 billion and counting. Projected cost of maintenance for that one plane's lifespan alone is over a trillion dollars.

And that's just one military toy. There are countless others...

Some of the "illegals" who come here are fleeing political upheaval that was probably caused in part by our foreign policy, or our CIA.

However, most of them come here simply to work. Because we love us some cheap labor, and the artificially low prices that come with it. So, blow up the unions and bring in the migrant workers! Hell, they'll work for next to nothing!

The solutions to these things aren't as complicated as some would have you believe.

A return to higher tax rates for the richest Americans would be a good start. How many billionaires do we really need? A top down audit of the Pentagon surely would help, as would a freeze on any new weapons systems, until every penny is accounted for. How about a transaction tax for Wall Street? Single payer healthcare would benefit everyone--except the insurance industry.

And if you want tariffs, let's put a tariff on any American branded product made in Asia and then imported to the U.S. Sure WalMart and Apple will scream, but they've gotten fat off of cheap, almost slave, labor for far too long.

If people were paid a fair wage, and not that "right to work" crap, the market for "illegal" labor would shrink considerably.

And a healthy, balanced, fair economy could easily absorb the ones who do still come here.

Of course, none of this will ever happen with a traitorous, racist, snake oil salesman in the White House and a Republican controlled Congress and Supreme Court.

So...never mind.

Just pass the popcorn.

Concern Troll, I didn't label you a Republican by saying to you. "Maybe, Concern Troll, you and your entire lower half of the economic structure might want to ask the Republican party..."

If you feel I was labeling you a Republican, maybe that had more to do with your using the word "Democratic" twice in your preceding missive than anything I said....

B. Franklin, Great commentary, but that damned "profit motive" will short-circuit "fairness" most every time. And I mean "damned" in the sense that "the love of money is the root of all evil," and, thus, falls under Satan's purview....

welcome to Amerika!
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/06/family-separation-is-horrifying-but-we-cant-go-numb-and-turn-away.html

One of Trumps sadistic Nazi's.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/propublica-recording-children-crying-family-separation_us_5b2811a6e4b0f0b9e9a3d035

We need to realize that the Republicans care more about their deified and holy "laws" and their strict enforcement than in taking any meaningful human, compassion-based, or morality-based factors into their impassioned and adrenaline-amped enforcement of their almighty "laws."

Yes, this is the Republicans' religion, and I believe they practice their devotion to it much more than any kind of similar devotion to God and the Scriptures.

I base this conclusion on hearing, for many years, a zealotry from Republicans in reciting "the law requires it," "I am following the law to the letter," and other sorts of rhetoric that almost never includes anything resembling compassion, goodwill, or kindness.

Yes, we are a nation of laws, but does that supersede "One Nation Under God" and "In God We Trust?" One never hears the word "God" or "per Jesus' teachings" in an almost universal machismo-based, testosterone-laden, bullying "enforcement" of the law--both in action and talking points.

This is the uncompromisingly intransigent, bad-ass, bullying, unsympathetic, and aggressively militaristic, offensive law "enforcement" that trump's Republican party promulgates. Kindness, empathy, cooperation, and respect are seen by these "soldiers on crime" as weakness to be eradicated.

Is THIS the face of America we want to project to the world?


I really hate to think what shenanigans are going on behind the scenes as these distractions are foisted on us by the prez and congress. One after another. Trump tees them up and the congress and the media hit them into the stratosphere.

Know what the national slogan should be for all of our media...."LOOK SQUIRREL !!! ".

That's an easy one Ruben. Putin the Russian Orthodox Mafia boss and Pence and Sessions, the white supremists evangelistic jihadists have taken over by giving us and using a moron clown that in due time they will dispatch in an ugly way. So to stay safe i am off to the River with Saint John.
Hallelujah

You know why the folks back home keep voting for Trump? Read this big safety appeal and understand the old home voters:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-federation-independent-businesses-75th-anniversary-celebration/

Red meat galore. Immigration= MS13

It really is simply straight up fascism.
And the only way for the other party to compete is to give in on some issues to survive.

Or become irrelevant.

One should think long and hard about telling a large percentage of America they are racists on a continual basis.

Because the response is more of red meat, not less.

How many times do I have to post the Dems just don't appeal to me, and it sure isn't because of racism. And the cards that Trump is playing are straight fascism, which is always the desire of the old. Law and order, baby.

Economic bad decisions are at the root of the problem.

And the eternal war is beyond ridiculous.

If Trump pulls out of Afpak, he will win re-election.

And you can bet he is going to start flying that big plane around the US to push his brand of R- and it will go well outside of the big cities.

Very well.

their coming for you all

https://extranewsfeed.com/if-trumps-impeachment-leads-to-civil-war-armed-rednecks-will-be-coming-for-you-2d644a84e8de

Concern Troll, I do call the trumpsters unChristian racists and "all the other nations need to smooch America's glues ugly americans."

This is not only to highlight their religious hypocrisy, but also to point out how the trumpsters are a clear and present danger to democracy in their intolerance to the "middle of the road" voter who reads what I say online.

As I see it, it will be those voters in the political middle who must decide whether democracy is important enough to them to repudiate trump's republican party in November.

It is these centrists I look to educate.

they are simply enforcing ... the laws as they currently exist.

I imagine that you believe this, but it's not true.

One law at issue is the Foley consent decree, which says that 20 days is the longest that kids can be separated from their parents. The Trump ICE has been making the immediate separations into permanent separation as quickly as possible: keeping no records of parent/child connections, moving quickly to permanently transfer the children to institutions or foster care far from the border. The 20-day limit in the consent decree was intended to allow those requesting asylum to work with the federal government's agency created to help such people petition for asylum. You will be unsurprised that this agency has been defunded, and is effectively unavailble.

Further, ICE has been physically turning asylum-seekers away from the official Ports of Entry at which they are legally allowed to present themselves and petition for asylum. When those turned away set foot on ordinary US territory, they are arrested for unlawful entry, and treated as if they had sneaked in.

The immigration laws are bad enough, and the issue is fraught with all the problems that Concern Troll and Rogue acknowledge.

But the fascist "zero-tolerance" behavior of the unleashed ICE under Trump/Sessions is new, is clearly counter to the spirit of the law, and has adopted as policy deliberate, immediate, permanent destruction of families.

Bradley, that's a tall order.
Socrates believed an educated electorate was necessary for a democracy to function properly.

An educated electorate.

I'm afraid that ship has sailed.

Best of luck to you.

I have tried educating Trump supporters up here in the White Mountains. Currently, I am 0 for 20.

Substantiation:

https://www.govexec.com/management/2018/06/analysis-nielsen-says-its-law-detain-asylum-seekers-its-not-according-these-rules/149132/

Ruben, I think you missed this at the end of my "mission statement:"

"As I see it, it will be those voters in the political middle who must decide whether democracy is important enough to them to repudiate trump's republican party in November.

It is these undecided centrists I look to educate."

Ruben, I don't give a flying rat's behind about educating the trumpsters. Not only are they a lost cause, but I am totally indifferent to the likely eternal fate that awaits them. As far as I'm concerned, they earned it by their vile earthly-god worship. If their afterlife is the worst possible, that's their problem.

My interest is in continually highlighting TO THE POLITICAL MIDDLE how the trumpsters want an authoritarian state that will codify their hatred of those different from them into governmental edicts that marginalize, institutionalize, and imprison those whom they hate. The trumpsters are that vindictive and evil.

My fervent hope is that these centrist voters I am trying to reach see how the trumpsters are a clear and present threat to our democracy, which, however imperfect, is something these centrists see as both under attack AND worth fighting trump and his storm-troopers to save.

Further substantiation that Trump/Sessions are not merely "enforcing the laws":

https://www.vice.com/amp/en_us/article/a3a798/trump-has-quietly-cut-legal-aid-for-migrant-kids-separated-from-parents

To the contrary, they purposely created this situation.

Ex Phx Planner, you made this statement,

"Also, I find John's statement of breaking up families as being "shrewd" (e.g. effective)as troubling and disappointing. Another reason why Christianity is becoming less and less popular in this country. If that is representative of the ethics, morality, and character that churches are teaching, I'll pass, and so will my son."

I think what many of the evangelical evengreedier churches preach is a "God meant you to be rich" gospel that, while obviously antithetical to Jesus' teachings, as the effect of demonizing those less fortunate.

The other corollary effect of this "rich" gospel is those hearing it see those less fortunate as both not ambitious enough to be "rich" and, thus, not worthy of the human rights protections the trump forced child separation campaign obviously violates. In other words, it's their own fault they aren't "worthy enough" to be accorded basic human rights--and, consequently the same freedoms these white majoritarian evangelical evengreediers have.

That God is rolling his eyes is putting it mildly.

Concern Troll
I agree with you that calling right wingers racist and expecting them to self-reflect and change is a complete waste of time.

However, because racism is a root cause/driver of a range of social problems we must identify it and condemn it wherever it appears (and to be clear, racism means not just racist people, but racist ideology that has been imbedded into institutions, policies, and laws sometimes going back a century the details and mechanics of which are often not obvious)

That said, I think there are effective ways of doing this and some methods - employed mostly by college students and a few professors – are counter-productive.
I also think continuing to mount the evidence that the right is racist is smart politics in the long run. The country is getting browner and I believe that there are enough whites that find a racist political party as untasteful.

As has often happened when the subject turns to immigration here on RC, I feel the need to belatedly and foolishly jump in and offer a contrary view. (Warning: long post ahead) Some here seem to be upset with Jon for even mildly suggesting that there may be more than one point of view on this. I find it refreshing because, frankly, the Left seems to have lost its collective mind in the era of Trump, no offense to anyone here on the Left. Since Donald Trump first rode down the escalator and said Mexico was sending us rapists and murderers (and also, he's sure, some good people), it has been hard to find public figures on the Left who will even acknowledge any need to enforce immigration law.


The videos of young children being removed from a parent or parents are heart wrenching, absolutely. I can't help but think, though, that this is precisely why the videos are shown. It's like gasoline on the already fiery emotions of those who hate Trump. The more emotional a situation is, the less people are likely to be able to think or act rationally.


The policy of family separation should be changed, tough enforcement of the law should have limits and separating young children from their mothers and/or fathers seems like a reasonable place to draw the line. However, people are quick to blame the President, Border Patrol, ICE, DHS, christians, etc but why does nobody think to also blame the parents?


If families come to a port of entry or even a U.S. consulate in Mexico and claim asylum, they will be kept together while being processed. The parents who choose to make the dangerous trek to remote crossings with their kids are the ones who are jailed and their kids put in separate facilities. The family in the trunk in the top picture wasn't put in there by Trump or the Border Patrol, the parents made a calculated decision to put their family in a trunk hoping it would work (hopefully it wasn't summertime). Surely many of them also realize that if they get caught, they could be separated from their kids but make the choice anyway. Surely many also realize the other dangers like exposure, unscrupulous coyotes and cartel criminals, human traffickers, immigrants locked in trailers and left in the hot sun, etc. Desperate people will do desperate things, but ultimately it's the parents who are responsible for their children.


Liberals rarely come out and say it, but many seem to believe that everyone in the world has a right to come here. They certainly do have a right to try, but we also have a right to limit the number since we can hardly accommodate, say, two billion immigrants (assuming half the Third World population would have an interest in living in the West). What's the right number for us? That's debatable, but I don't see how one can argue that it's bad for US to have control over that number. It doesn't seem fair that those who live within ground travel distance get to come and stay if they can just make it in our borders, while those too far away can only go through the tougher legal process.


Not enforcing our laws incentivizes people to take risks and break laws, putting their lives and increasingly the lives of their children in danger. Allowing people captured at the border to be released because they have children makes an incentive for more people to come with children. Basic economics. We are a compassionate people, which is why we take worldwide refugees and have an asylum system. Again, the numbers are up for debate, but the bottom line is that if you are truly desperate for reasons that go beyond being poor, we have a system that can potentially help you that doesn't require you to risk your life or children illegally crossing our border.


Ex Phx Planner makes a good point that it could be considered immoral to incentivize people to make remote desert crossings. What could be a good solution to that? I have to say it...a serious, difficult-to-breach physical barrier (a.k.a. Trump's big beautiful wall with a big door in it). Is it immoral to build a wall? Most on the Left seem to think so, but I would submit that the situation as it stands is immoral. Seems to me we have two choices as a country. 1. Let as many people as want to come here do so quickly, easily and legally. 2. Let in a specific number that is right for our economy and society and control our border in a way that doesn't draw people to make dangerous treks with their children.


I'm not sure I understood Jon's point in referencing the Rich Lowry article. To my eyes, it seems like a pretty rational and sober take on the border situation (And yes it is an op-ed, as the title implies. If you aren't familiar with National Review, it is a commentary magazine. Everything they write is from a conservative point of view and they don't hide that).


It looks like the President signed an order to change the separation policy yesterday, though probably not to the satisfaction of Democrats. One suspects that the politicians and media figures tearing their robes and gnashing their teeth over family separation aren't so much worried about the families staying together as they are in maintaining the system where apprehended people are just let go into the country and the lax enforcement status quo of previous administrations is continued. I'm not crazy about the executive order either, as I think a legislative fix would be better. I don't think the congressional Democrats are interested in solving a situation that makes the President look bad, and perhaps some Republicans aren't either. The Democratic senate plan is absurd and seems designed to repel Republican votes. The Cruz plan seems reasonable, but expensive. I predict neither will go anywhere.

If families come to a port of entry or even a U.S. consulate in Mexico and claim asylum, they will be kept together while being processed.

No, you underestimate Trump/Sessions deliberate cruelty. ICE has been physically preventing many would-be asylum seekers from getting to the Ports of Entry at all, re-routing them to ordinary US territory where they can be immediately charged with illegal entry.
This is part of the doctrine of "zero tolerance".

Also, the federal agency that is supposed to process the claims of asylum seekers has been defunded.

the lax enforcement status quo of previous administrations is continued.

Please explain what was "lax" about Obama's immigration polcies. Be specific.

Jon,

I always find it hard to understand those, like you, who take the position of “enforcing our laws” as the principle issue that is in question. It don’t believe you. Let’s take your straw man argument of “two billion immigrants from Latin America” would come here if allowed. The only way that would happen is if there were jobs here.

One of the reasons lefties don’t like the term “illegal immigrants” is that no rightwinger ever uses the term “illegal businesses” or “illegal Americans” who provide them employment. If gaining control of our borders is your true goal (which, again, I doubt) then why not stop the root cause of it – businesses and individuals that employ them and use the same demonizing language against them? Or, here is a kicker, what if anyone who employed an illegal immigrant were thrown in jail indefinitely and have their children taken from them? Sounds crazy? But, as you ruthlessly say, “they took that risk.” Wipe your hands, look away, tell yourself that you are not responsible for that kind of cruelty. You are. If “enforcing the law” was all that mattered to you, you wouldn’t support jailing people, and certainly not children.

Entering the country illegally is a misdemeanor offense. That’s the law. So if you want “the law enforced” – you are enforcing a law that is classified the same as some traffic violations. Should the government jail a white suburban soccer mom and take away her children for speeding? Please, it would be hands across America led by Fox news if that happened. Immigration is not a “law enforcement” issue or even an economic one, it’s a racist issue, pure and simple.

I find the reflexive use of "racist" and "racism" increasingly unhelpful and grating.

Every tribe and nation state throughout time has had its ruling customs, majority group, class structure, and the determination to preserve it. Does that mean it should be preserved? That's a different question. Time changes things. But anyone who believes that America is a uniquely "racist" oppressive nation knows little history or anything about the world.

We need to find better language. Now you can flame me. But I've always liked the intelligent, heterodox nature of the comments here.

p.s., I can only imagine the trouble Trump and the GOP have been causing while all eyes of the media and the opposition are locked on this one event.


John,

I'm not sure what you are saying here. That racism isn't a thing in America? I get that people who are on social media all day are probably fed up with the PC culture warriors on the left but, as I've said above, are a very small slice of the left. Every party has their college sophomores.

I don't think I'm using the term reflexively, on the contrary, I think you are reacting to that term reflexively. Using the word "racism" is only unhelpful to those who are triggered by that term and are reflexively defensive, probably because there is still some sub-conscious deep seated shame within us whites and we have real trouble thinking rationally when that term is used.

I get that issues are complex and racism, like anything else, is not a Total Explanation. I do believe that immigration as a political issue has it's roots in racism and to ignore that is to ignore reality, however uncomfortable that may be.

Racism, of course, is not unique to America, but why is that an arguement to not talk about it? Ignoring racism is to ignore American history. Slavery, eugenics, redlining, Jim Crow, the war on drugs - hell, the entire institution of American criminal justice. I could go on. Immigration will be looked back upon as as yet another time that our long history of racism reared its ugly head.

If you disagree, please, address the contradictions that I've pointed out.

Rogue :

Agreed that calling someone "racis"t has changed the minds of a very small number of those so charged.

But within the community of people who are trying to rid their own minds of racism, it remains an important concept.

I am a white racist, though my beloved granddaughters identify black, though the first woman I dated was black, though many of the finest soldiers with whom I served were black, even though the tech company for which I work is now about 50% of Asian origin. I grew up in a family in which patriarchy and racism (aginst Jews and Irish and Catholics, as well as people of color) were considered natural and inevitable and the mark of "quality". I recognize some of my own racism and misogyny, and struggle with them, especially the mostly unconscious parts.

But we do need some other way of reaching those people whose circles of empathy, their Gemeinshchafts, are drawn very small. One would have thought that the words of Jesus would have done the trick for those who claim to follow him, but apparently not. It may be that xenophobic tribalism is innate in humans; that might explain why some version of the golden rule is found in nearly every formal religion, but is almost always honored in the breach.

It has become apparent that only the actual experience of misfortune or oppression of themselves or someone close to them causes conservatives to have the "there but for the grace of God go I" cognition, and even then it's usually very limited to a specific circumstance.

So this disagreement about where to draw the boundary of our circle of empathy is unlikely ever to end.

it has been hard to find public figures on the Left who will even acknowledge any need to enforce immigration law.

When Obama left office, the rate of illegal immigration was at a 42-year low. Under Trump it has of course further declined.

Many of the families we have been deliberately destroying did not intend to break any laws; they fled from Honduras or Guatemala intending to follow the legal procedure (under Foley) of applying for asylum. Trump and Sessions and Miller promulgated a series of policy decisions (defund the agency that processes asylum requests, restrict or deny access to ports of entry at the border, treat every entry as a deliberate attempt to enter illegally, treat children of detainees as unaccompanied illegal entrants) purposely designed to prevent most of those seeking asylum from gaining legal residency, and to punish them for their aspirations by permanently breaking up their families.

And they did this confident that much of the Republican base will cheer them on, and they are not incorrect.

The winner so far is Trump. His base loves him even more and the appearance of a slight back off didnt hurt him and might even get him a few extra votes.
Joels right in that those seeking asylum legally are being denied access to legal ports of entry. Plenty of documentation of such.
Walls are not morality issues. They are just stupid as they provide no real solutions and destroy pristine habitat.

Given Donald's love of Dictators he has got to like the new Austrian law of criminally prosecuting people that help immigrants.

The winner so far is Trump.

I think not, Cal.

Yes, his most fervent supporters feel rewarded and energized.

OTOH, look here :
https://www.facebook.com/donate/490507544717085/10200617687101688/

Over sixteen million dollars, much of which is going to be a permanent rotating bail fund for asylum seekers, so that they are not detained, and their kids can stay with them while they seek legal status. That's a powerful change.

And, the fact that Trump is denying legal immigration (and applause from the right) is just further evidence that "law enforcement" is not the real issue. Why would you want to further restrict legal immigration? (and therefore, just incentivize more illegal, because what's the point of even trying the legal process?)

I can think of a reason, and it's the most objective, rational, and evidence-based theory I've heard.

Also, no doubt we should be suspicious of decoy issues that distract the public from other issues. But unless you think abusing thousands of children is not a priority (not just because they're brown of course), who cares? What's with the instinct to think that we must look for something more important than mass child abuse behind the scenes?

Those of us who are not Republicans may take some comfort in this bit of polling:

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/trumps-reverse-midas-touch-extends-attitudes-immigration

Joel hope you are correct. I have a lot of friends that work trying to save folks threatened with murder and starvation

From Trumps supporters:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/the-immigration-fight-is-just-beginning-and-the-media-are-going-to-lose

PS, I got the above article in my email this AM from a long time attorney friend who says upon arrest you separate people from each other. His Solution do not cross the US border illegally.

I am friends with people that work here.
Ruben Garcia, the director of Annunciation House, a Catholic hospitality house in El Paso.

Regarding ports of legal entry:
https://www.newyorker.com/news/dispatch/we-are-at-capacity-an-asylum-standoff-on-the-bridge-between-ciudad-juarez-and-el-paso?mbid=nl_Daily%2006212018&CNDID=48614199&spMailingID=13735436&spUserID=MTc5Mjg4MTEyMTI0S0&spJobID=1421942774&spReportId=MTQyMTk0Mjc3NAS2

To Ex Phx Planner: I think the people and businesses that create the demand for ever-lower employment costs--and thus are much of the "magnet" drawing many of the "illegals" here--need to be thrown in the clink.

That being said, it will never happen simply because capitalism, and its holy profit motive (which encourages cutting labor costs wherever possible--ever heard of "right to work?") are sacrosanct and infallible. Even joe arpaio was left blathering platitudes when asked by Chris Cuomo last week about prosecuting business owners who employed "illegals." I guarantee you that the Republicans will never stand for businesses and their owners being held accountable for the illegals they employ.

Why has no one commented on the global warming factor Rogue alluded to? There has been an ongoing global warming migration of Anglos to the Pacific Northwest from the Southwest. And it's one of the reasons (along with violence) for the Middle East and African migrations to Europe.

Speaking of Anglos, who but the Anglos created global warming (temperatures have risen since the 1850's and the beginning of the Industrial Age)? As Mother Nature might say, "Payback's a %$#@!, ain't it?" We Americans created this; Why are we somehow exempt from global warming's effects--including migration?


Rogue wrote:
“p.s., I can only imagine the trouble Trump and the GOP have been causing while all eyes of the media and the opposition are locked on this one event.”

A significant part of the Republican midterm election strategy is to have the electorate focus on immigration to misdirect attention from the widely unpopular tax cut mostly benefiting the very wealthy and the Republicans’ failure to deliver a much promised replacement of Obamacare.

The thoughtful discussion here suggests to me they will succeed.

Gallup : 75% of Americans view immigration as a good thing

https://abcnews.go.com/US/75-percent-americans-immigration-good-thing-gallup-poll/story?id=56071908

drifter, the distraction may succeed, but there is a very real chance that the revulsion over trump's child separation campaign will stay in enough people's minds to be a huge negative impact on the republican party in November.

Here's hoping so.

I agree Bradley in general. The strategic question is the impact on voters in the House seats actually in play in November. For example, the Congressional district which includes Duluth, Minnesota where trump gave a full frontal performance this week. An important number of those demographically constituted districts in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan and so forth might not be moved in the way you are but nonetheless distracted from the issues that actually impact them such as healthcare, tax cut table scraps and numerous other republican acts that they have the life experience to understand.

*Illegal Immigration vs. Legal Immigration*
I must commend the author for distinguishing between illegal immigration and legal immigration. In our current age of bastardized lexicon, progressives (in the immigration debate) have conflated the two exceptionally different matters in order to confuse the issue and push forward a progressive agenda.

It's all too often that those with opposing perspectives speak past one another. When our language is made opaque and terms are intentionally conflated we enter an even more confusing and frustrating reality.


*Illegal Immigration*
With this distinction in mind, it seems obvious that most American citizens would regard illegal immigration as a problematic issue. If you desire open borders or closed borders, you most likely believe all people geographically located and living/working in America should have some type of documentation - enabling those within to move, work, live inside these United States. How this is realized is the essence of the legal immigration debate.


*Legal Immigration*
The central question raised in the author’s post can be summarized as - “what makes the United States, the United States.”

Is it the government? The soil? The resources? The air? The institutions? The people?

If you take a man from a foreign land and teleport him to the United States, is he magically an American? Does he have American values? Western values? Enlightenment values?

If you take an American and teleport him to mainland China, is he automatically Chinese? Does he have mainland Chinese values? Eastern values?

Is it simply geographical location that makes an American, American? A Chinese, Chinese?

It’s should be evident that it is more than that. It's time. It's values. It's culture.

In lay terms, it's “roots.” It’s the reason that American families who have a lineage of building, living, and dying for our country do have deeper roots than someone who just arrived on an H1B. On a state level, it’s the reason a 5th generation Arizonan is bound to the state far more than a mid-western arrival or a snowbird. It's the same reason Rogue continues to write article after article about Arizona, it's history, it's people – while simultaneously being estranged from it. It's "in” him. Is it "in" a recent transplant from California or the Midwest? On a relevant macro level, are our societal values and culture "in" a recent immigrant from abroad? No. these roots must be established over time.

Legal immigration should be diverse and measured. Inasmuch to ensure that America remains a “melting-pot” rather than a “salad-bowl”. One tribe rather than multiple competing tribes.

With this in mind, it should not be strange for a progressive to at least consider the possibility that many/most people who oppose the leftist push on immigration do so not because of race, but because of culture. Unfortunately (in my view), most commenters here view race as a fundamental factor in the immigration debate - "anglo" (Rogue, Bradley) "white" (rogue, soleri, Ex). Moreover, and not without serious consequence, many commenters here conflate race with culture, multiracial with multicultural. Race and culture, while inextricably intertwined in some parts of the world (e.g. where I currently live and work, Asia) are distinct in America. Through multiple waves of immigration, America has become a multiracial, uni-cultural society, Where the color of skin is of no consequence because we all believe in America and all share a similar culture.


*He’s a Racist*
As I said before – many commenters here and I, we are living in different realities. We are watching different movies. Some commenters by this point probably believe I’m racist, especially considering a commenter even accused Rogue of racism! I found this laughable until I realized he was in fact correct. Most commenters here make race a primary factor in his/her worldview. Rogue posits that labeling Americans in opposition to central tenets of leftist/progressive ideology “racists” only hardens them, and in a way, I find this to be true though most likely not as commenters here would expect. I believe the accusations make those accused further question the accuser’s progressive worldview, grasp on reality, and ability to use facts rather than emotion to vet reality, as the accuser sees it, and come to rational conclusions. Overall, these accusations, especially in conjunction with the liberal sprinkling of “Nazi”, make me question the mental stability of the progressive left.


P.S. Rogue – thank you for the posts on Arizona history. Though I enjoy all posts, I find your “Arizona story” extremely engaging.

While we sleep: The NSDAP creeps.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/angela-merkel-donald-trump-immigration_us_5b2bbc25e4b00295f15a1d5d

Joel,

I spoke of administrations, plural, not necessarily singling out the Obama administration. Border control has been weak throughout the modern era of increased migration. As far as the Obama record, border apprehensions were much lower (possibly as much due to economic conditions as degree of border enforcement) and deportations were lower, despite the President sometimes being referred to as "deporter in chief". ( https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/obama-record-deportations-deporter-chief-or-not ) But I give President Obama credit for putting a reasonable amount of money and effort into immigration enforcement. When he was elected, Democrats still sometimes talked about its importance and didn't always mind being seen as tough on illegal immigration. On the other hand, the catch and release practice seems to me pretty bogus and a sign of lack of seriousness. There's also the matter of DACA spurring the arrival of many thousands of unaccompanied minors.


I accuse all previous administrations of lax enforcement based on the results of their efforts. At least 11 million people here illegally (true number unknown) and Border Patrol agents estimate that for every one entrant apprehended, two get through. Congress gets blame too. The 2006 Border Fence act (voted for by Senators Obama, Clinton and Schumer back when it was cool to be for border enforcement) was quickly weakened the next year. ( http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/may/16/barack-obama/obama-says-border-fence-now-basically-complete/ ) All administrations have also been guilty of laxness on the other source of illegal immigration: visa violations.


Ex Phx Planner,

Two billion isn't a straw man so much as an absurd number that everyone would surely agree would be completely overwhelming for our country. Is there a more realistic number you would agree is too much? Immigration restrictionists would argue the current annual million-plus legal and any number of illegal is too much, while most liberals would strongly disagree and not even acknowledge that there is such a thing as too much.


I completely agree with you and Bradley that the ability to get jobs when here illegally is the primary magnet of southern border violations and a serious approach to minimizing it would address the employers in a tough way. This is evidence that conventional Republicans, despite their rhetoric, are generally uninterested in solving our border problems. Politicians of both parties take their orders from the big donors, and many corporations and their lobbyists make it clear to them that they don't want e-verify or any other effective program passed.


I don't believe it's necessarily advocating cruelty to say that parents are responsible for their children and for the decisions they make and risks they take with them. Do you not agree with that concept?


I'm not wiping my hands, because I agree that the family separation is not a good policy. You seem to want to make me a stand in for Trump and make me responsible for everything bad that happens in border enforcement. My position is not to defend every practice of the current federal immigration bureaucracy. I hope for and advocate for within my tiny sphere of influence a humane, fair, consistent and effective application of immigration law that allows us to control the number and type of immigrants we, as a society through our politicians, decide is in the best interest of our citizens, legal immigrants already here and the future of our country.


I do believe fair and consistent enforcement of laws is an absolute moral good. The Rule of Law that we have here (however imperfect) is actually a major factor in the desire of many to emigrate here from their countries. The lack of it and lack of justice found in many countries is one of the things that makes ours a shining beacon to the rest of the world. I do believe that if they had the means to travel and assurance they would be allowed in, there are probably two billion people that would be on our doorstep tomorrow.


Culture not Racism?
Major racially and ethnically structured institutions included slavery, segregation, the American Indian Wars, Native American reservations, Native American boarding schools, immigration and naturalization law and INTERNMENT camps.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_the_United_States

ὀστρακισμός, are you a troll from overseas? Gearing up for the midterms? From your comment I surmise you have read a lot about the US and maybe even visited, but really don’t have a good feel for the place.

I do believe fair and consistent enforcement of laws is an absolute moral good.

Since 1970: all Democratic administrations have pursued this description of justice.

No Republican administration in the last forty years, and no Republican congress since 1985 or so, has done so. Around Tom DeLay and Phil Gramm's time, they began to forget to even pretend.

@Jefferson

Am I a troll - My comments were not intended to "troll". Rogue solicited comments and in this particular post I felt compelled to give my opinion - not in small part because all of the other previous political posts/comments were of a homogeneous nature.

Am I overseas - Yes (as I noted in my previous comment), temporarily.


As for the remainder of your question - first, thank you for considering me educated or at least well-read on the current political and cultural environment. I've found that it typical that most progressives consider those right of center to be uneducated - as @Ruben illustrated in his previous comment.

Second, I'm a native Arizonan and have been overseas for a couple of years. That said, I think this is a good example of how the worldview of the left was destroyed by the 2016 election and has yet to be rebuilt in a way that can accurately interpret reality and ultimately yield an accurate prediction the future.

In this example, instead of naturally considering me as…

One of ≈63M Americans who hold different views, voted for Trump, and posted on a small blog that specializes in Arizona centric posts, because I’m interested in my home.

You consider me as…

An overseas (technically correct), troll (of Macedonian or Russian bot nature?) who happened to single out this relatively small blog (which I enjoy tremendously) that specializes in Arizona-centric posts (I’m pretty sure Rogue isn’t an international columnist – and I’m sad to say I think I was too young to enjoy his columns when he worked at the Republic) in an attempt to persuade the un-persuadable for the upcoming mid-terms?

I guess it depends on your worldview when evaluating which one of these is more aligned with reality.

Is there anything I could say that would persuade you? Probably not, but in the event, you are deciding to visit Arizona for the first time (and I suppose as an addition to Rogue's "where to go post")–

-Stopping at LGO for breakfast and a nutmilk latte (what is nut milk anyway?) after a morning Camelback hike is the best way to spend a spring Saturday morning and that the Padre was the best pizza on the menu until it was removed (you can still order it though).
-The best burger isn’t at Delux, it’s at OHSO.
-Harumi was the best sushi in the valley until a cook set the place on fire (since reopened)
-Farm at South Mountain is a gem that should be treasured and visited frequently
-The Orpheum Lofts conversion, though beautiful, was a fiasco that left owners without parking (except for a select few) – so if you decide to buy, you’ll have to get monthly parking at a nearby garage.
-If you go to Church, Central Methodist does have history (Great post, Rogue!), but New City is more lively.
-There isn’t a reason to go anywhere west of the 17 or for that matter, south of the 10 (besides hiking and the Farm)

That said, I could still be a Macedonian troll or an elaborate Russian bot (///End Script///).

Is that U, Phoenix Sun Fan?

Thanks for the clarification ὀστρακισμός. Some of the ideas you expressed, such as the belief that a fifth generation American possesses a better awareness of America than a newly arrived citizen, I believed as well when I was younger. My having lived on various continents and in most regions of the continental US engaging in insightful livelihoods my beliefs have evolved and I no longer do.

Being American is not defined by location, culture or race. America is an idea that all citizens should have fundamental freedoms. In my experience with countless newly minted US citizens, I believe in general they have a greater appreciation and understanding of what America is supposed to be.

I asked above what annual number of new immigrants in America could be considered too many. I threw out the ridiculous figure of two billion as a number we might be able to all agree would be too many. What should the ideal number be? From a macro view, I'm not sure myself exactly. However, on a local case study level, this is an definite example of too much:

https://www.city-journal.org/html/chain-migration-comes-hazleton-15832.html

It's a story I just came upon recently about the town of Hazelton, PA which has undergone massive demographic changes in the last 20 years. This story highlights many of the concerns of people like me who preach caution on immigration.


Rogue coined the somewhat pejorative term "white majoritarian" while at the same time seeming to at least partially sympathize with some of their concerns. I'm pretty sure he would consider me one.
http://www.roguecolumnist.com/rogue_columnist/2017/02/white-majoritarianism.html?cid=6a00e54fdb30b9883401b7c8d8697b970b#comment-6a00e54fdb30b9883401b7c8d8697b970b


Jon7190, but the important question is, "Do you consider yourself a white majoritarian?"

Is Trump winning?
https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-trumps-washington/trumps-cynical-immigration-strategy-might-work-for-himagain?mbid=nl_Daily%20062218&CNDID=48614199&spMailingID=13742373&spUserID=MTc5Mjg4MTEyMTI0S0&spJobID=1422038193&spReportId=MTQyMjAzODE5MwS2

ὀστρακισμός(?) wrote:

"Through multiple waves of immigration, America has become a multiracial, uni-cultural society, Where the color of skin is of no consequence because we all believe in America and all share a similar culture."

You're kidding about that skin color thing, right?

By the way, there's just one race. Many skin colors. One race.

Bradley Dranka wrote:
"Jon7190, but the important question is, "Do you consider yourself a white majoritarian?""

I would prefer not to embrace an apparently derisive term that the coiner and most on here probably consider a fancy way of saying racist. I will just say that if I lived my whole life in Hazelton, PA I think I would not be happy about the changes.

If anyone thinks that makes me a racist, I would challenge you to imagine that Hazelton is your hometown and honestly ask yourself, with no one else looking or judging, if you would be fine with what's happened there.

@Cal
No - though I do also "lurk" on Skyscraper forum and I see a significant overlap of readers here and there.

@Jefferson
I'm happy that you consider yourself globe-trotting cosmopolite. In my experience living and working overseas I've found that very few individuals hold American values. As you note - "America is an idea that all citizens should have fundamental freedoms." For example, the Bill of Rights? I'm glad that you and I are mostly likely on the same page regarding amendments 1 & 2.


@B. Franklin
At least the left keeps it simple with race (though maybe conflated species with race). How many genders are we at now?

Yes, race (distinct populations with varying physical and genetic characteristics) is inconsequential in America when being accepted as an American by other Americans.

Come to Asia. Move to Japan - If you are not Japanese, you will never be Japanese. You will never be accepted as Japanese.

Move to China. If you are not (Han) Chinese, you will never be Chinese. You will never be accepted as Chinese.

Move to Korea. If you are not Korean, you will never be Korean. You will never be accepted as a Korean.

The West is special. America, in particular, truly is the shining city upon a hill. We strive to treat each person as an individual - which ironically is the very same unique element that progressives are trying to destroy through tribal identity politics.

Overall, I find it extremely interesting when I read comments here claiming that you are racist, I am racist, everyone is racist, America is racist - it makes me believe that they haven't experienced the rest of the world.

Frankly, most of the left (which includes nearly all commenters on this blog) are behind the curve on why POTUS was elected. For example, based on previous posts:

@Soleri is so far off the reservation he is "thankful there is a deep state" - thankful that the will of the citizenry should be supplanted by that of unelected bureaucrats (unless of course those elected align with his political views, right?)

@Cal is a "citizen of the world" - How did you get that passport and what benefits does it convey?

We hear you - we think you're crazy. We see you comparing this administration to the 3rd Reich, throwing "Nazi" around like it's going out of style - and we think you're in hysterics. We wonder to ourselves how it's possible that you CAN'T see it.

The Republicans and Democrats are largely the same. Our leaders are depraved and complicit in enriching themselves (power and money) at the expense of the citizenry. @Ruben gets it. This was the reason there was significant right/left overlap in the election of Trump.

Rogue posits that POTUS could be reelected in 2020 and that the mid-terms. In my movie, my perception of reality - he's right.

ὀστρακισμός, you have made some brave and important contributions in this thread.

You lose me, however, in trying to normalize Trump, who is dangerous and uniquely unqualified. He lost the popular vote. This election turned on 80,000 votes in three states, with Russian interference. Never forget.

Thanks Rogue. As I said, I appreciate all of your posts, especially those pertaining to the history of Arizona.

The political posts I enjoy, but I like the majority of POTUS' supporters, typically refuse to engage with progressives on political issues. There isn't room for discussion when the canned response (typically) is the claim that I am uneducated, racist (overtly or through implicit bias/mind reading), or a Nazi. The labeling of someone you disagree with as a Nazi doesn't even offend me any longer. I'm simply befuddled. How can someone who has any knowledge of history can lob this accusation with such ease? For lack of a better word, it's crazy.

Regarding the current political situation and normalizing Trump. I'll take three of the points you listed (ignoring the popular vote comment because of its irrelevance).

1.Dangerous
2.Uniquely unqualified
3.Russian interference

I'd ask you and fellow commenters this - have you for a moment considered that your perspective, on this tiny slice of reality, could be incorrectly interpreting the recent past and inaccurately predicting the future?

With your own three points, have you considered the possibility that by 2024 the world could be in relatively good order, the FedGov and American economy could be humming, and there could be no sign of Russian interference?

In your movie. In your reality. Could this happen? If it did happen, would your perspective on POTUS change? Is your perspective malleable given new signals and new information? If the answer is no, then by all accounts, it is clearly hysteria and six more years is a long time to be mired in a hysterical state of being.

By all current signals, it seems to me that POTUS is handling international (realigning trade policy and confronting China) and domestic issues (the economy and the culture war - the degree of which is debatable given your political views, but there haven't been any tribal bloodshed as of yet) in a reasonable fashion and that the Russia investigation, after two years, is still searching for evidence.

I think it's possible that the current situation could turn volatile or that evidence of Russian interference (this is a very obtuse term and should be specified) could arise - and in that case I would be more than willing to concede and agree with you on any one of the three points that you raised.

Commenters here should entertain the thought, no matter how fleeting, that everything could be fine - in fact, the future could be better than fine - it could be great.

If you can't conceive of this possible reality, then consider the possibility that you may be in a hysterical state.

ὀστρακισμός, thank you for chiming in! It's good to see an articulate and non-flaming conservative mix it up here. I have been occasionally commenting here for a few years when I feel lead to offer an alternative to the generally liberal sensitivities of the RC commentariat, many times on immigration issues. I hope you weren't lumping my posts above in the category of homogeneous liberal thought. For what it's worth, it was obvious to me on your first post that you are not a troll, bot or foreigner! I was once accused by Rogue himself of being a paid Trump campaign agent, but we worked past that (no hard feelings, Jon!)


I believe there are a number of genuinely good-hearted progressives on this blog (including the author), which is why I spend time reading and commenting here. That said, it has also been my observation that if one engages with the Left on any topic that touches on race, being called a racist is an occupational hazard. And as you observed, they tend to want to tie race into everything. At the risk of getting all conspiracist here, I believe the strategy of many of the more strident progressive elites in politics, media, and academia, which has been consciously or unconsciously incorporated by large numbers of everyday liberals, is to dehumanize, stigmatize and marginalize your opponents, with the goal of denying them any public voice and the ability to spread their ideas.


Rogue asked what else might be going on that the firestorm over family separation has been distracting from. I've noticed a few things, one being the Inspector General's report on the Clinton email investigation. Here's another:

http://www.newsweek.com/splc-nawaz-million-apologizes-981879

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-southern-poverty-law-center-has-lost-all-credibility/2018/06/21/22ab7d60-756d-11e8-9780-b1dd6a09b549_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.dd8491ac8fb1

The first link is a Newsweek story, the second link is insightful commentary if anyone unfamiliar is interested in why many are increasingly taking issue with the Southern Poverty Law Center. This ties into the idea above on the strategy of stigmatizing and destroying opponents of the Left.


The topic of Trump and the election is a can of worms that has been opened many times here. The alleged reasons Trump was elected are axiomatic for Rogue and others, though haven't been discussed at length that I've noticed in a while. It's a little bit of a stale subject, but could be reinvigorated by a new RC article on more recent developments r.e. the Mueller probe, Congressional investigations, IG reports, etc.

BTW, I'm curious what the translation of your screen name is. Care to share?

another Trump win?
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/americans-blame-undocumented-parents-trump-family-separations_us_5b2d4bc3e4b0040e2742cc90

Absolutely correct:
"@Cal is a "citizen of the world" - How did you get that passport and what benefits does it convey?

We hear you - we think you're crazy. We see you comparing this administration to the 3rd Reich, throwing "Nazi" around like it's going out of style - and we think you're in hysterics. We wonder to ourselves how it's possible that you CAN'T see it."

Yep, I think Donald Trump is a psychotic childish dangerous thing with great ambitions of being a king for life.
I wonder how it's possible that you CAN'T see it."

I see few positives in the future from Donald and his felonies companions.

Jon7190 to your question

ὀστρακισμός

the state of being banished or ostracized (excluded from society by general consent)

Tell conservative Republican George Will About the POSITIVES.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/george-will-vote-against-gop_us_5b2d95dee4b00295f15c8a75

From the American CONSERVATIVE news site.
Delusional Donald
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/trumps-parallel-reality/

DELUSIONAL
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/trumps-north-korea-fabulism/

Now try and think positive!
Prophets of impending calamity are rarely thanked for their efforts, especially when they turn out to be right.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/23/opinion/sunday/james-e-hansen-climate-global-warming.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region&region=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region

Trumps desire to be like his hero under whose leader ship many including children have died.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/fox-news-north-korean-state-tv-mashup-shows-scary-similarities-in-coverage_us_5b2cfa4fe4b00295f15bd71a

Maafa
The current “disaster and human response” at the southern border is a continuation of “commercial exploitation.”

For Trump and Bannon.
"A picture used to be a sum of additions. With me, a picture is a sum of destruction. "
Pablo Picasso

The case for open borders, google Masha Gessen at the New Yorker.

Read, at Politico
"Washington DC, the psychopath capital of America."

Note, the word destruction above should be destructions.

Trump picks up more votes.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-deportations-without-trial_us_5b2fbdaae4b0040e27442317

Trump Adviser Rips Into Stephen Miller: 'He's Waffen-SS'

https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-trump-adviser-rips-into-stephen-miller-he-s-waffen-ss-1.6192214

How Trump and Sessions keep moving the ball.
https://www.texastribune.org/2018/06/24/kids-exchange-deportation-migrants-claim-they-were-promised-they-could/

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)