musterion
Well-known member
Leftist is a better choice.
Why Don't the Liberals Want a Wall?
- Thread starter Jerry Shugart
- Start date
Leftist is a better choice.
Greg Jennings
New member
I think by your standard, many republicans are liberal. Not an objective standard
Greg Jennings
New member
Sure, a guy who voted for trump and wants illegal immigration reigned in (but in a way that will actually work) and wants to put America first by revamping our busted education system instead of continuing to fall behind Asia and Europe.....
.....is a leftist. Gotcha
musterion
Well-known member
A thing of beauty .
https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/1080618692415840256
https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/1080618692415840256
Why Don't the Liberals Want a Wall?
Notice that the 1% and the large corporations who received most of the $1 trillion "tax cuts," courtesy of the American taxpayer, have not volunteered to donate any of their profits toward financing the cost of building THE WALL as a "good will" gesture!
Assuming that the wall could be built for $25 billion, that would amount to only 0.25% of the financial "windfall" they received - apparently their loyalty to this President doesn't extend to bailing him out of this dilemma!
Notice that the 1% and the large corporations who received most of the $1 trillion "tax cuts," courtesy of the American taxpayer, have not volunteered to donate any of their profits toward financing the cost of building THE WALL as a "good will" gesture!
Assuming that the wall could be built for $25 billion, that would amount to only 0.25% of the financial "windfall" they received - apparently their loyalty to this President doesn't extend to bailing him out of this dilemma!
Aimiel
Well-known member
Trump wants it.
Trump had 2 years with majorities in both the House and the Senate to get funding for THE WALL - apparently Republican politicians were no more enamoured with it than their Democratic counterparts!
This President was offered legislation in January 2018 that included Democratic compromise providing $25 billion to fund THE WALL in return for a pathway to citizenship for "Dreamers" - the "GREAT NEGOTIATOR" in the White House, in his infinite wisdom, declined the offer!
musterion
Well-known member
orange man bad
WizardofOz
New member
Agreed. It certainly seems like a lot of money. And, historically speaking, it is. We have never spent more money for border security than we already are. I'm not sure that simply throwing money at a problem will be effective.
If Trump was trying to get a narrative out there, he has done that. Now, he needs to be willing to negotiate because I think he's asking for too much.
Well, it's one way to shrink the government. I feel for those people but it happens to workers in the private sector all the time. If they got a federal job, they should be good candidates in a low-unemployment economy.
We'll live. I think most will be surprised at how little we'll even notice.
genuineoriginal
New member
This explains the reasons:
| Gov. Richard Lamm: My plan to destroy America I have a secret plan to destroy America. If you believe, as many do, that America is too smug, too white-bread, too self-satisfied, too rich … then let’s destroy America. It is not that hard to do. History shows that nations are more fragile than their citizens think. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and they all fall, and that "an autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide." So here is my plan: 1. We must first make America a bilingual/bicultural country. History shows ... that no nation can survive the tension, conflict and antagonism of two competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. … Scholar Seymour Martin Lipset put it this way: "The histories of bilingual and bicultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension and tragedy." 2. I would then invent "multiculturalism" and encourage immigrants to maintain their own culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal ... there are no cultural differences that are important ... and the black and Hispanic dropout rate is only due to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out-of-bounds. 3. We can make the United States a "Hispanic Quebec" without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently: "… the apparent success of our own multiethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethno-centrically and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together." 4. I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with a salad bowl metaphor … I would make our fastest-growing demographic group the least educated. I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. … 5. I would then get the big foundations and Big Business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of victimology. ... I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population. 6. I would establish dual citizenship and promote divided loyalties. I would "celebrate diversity." … It stresses differences rather than commonalities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other … when they are not killing each other. A diverse peaceful or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together, and we can take advantage of this myopia. ... Dorf’s World History tells us the [ancient] Greeks believed they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature and worshiped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic games in honor of Zeus and venerated the shrine of Apollo at Delphi. A common enemy, Persia, threatened their liberty. Yet all of these bonds together were not strong enough to overcome two factors … local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions … . 7. Then I would place all these subjects off-limits and make them taboo to talk about. I would find a word similar to "heretic" in the 16th century that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like "racist," and "xenophobe" halt argument and conversation. I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra: because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good. 8. Lastly, I would censor Victor Davis Hanson’s book, "Mexifornia." This book is dangerous. It exposes my plan to destroy America. … This guy is on to my plan. |
TLDR: The Liberal Agenda will destroy America.
Last edited:
WizardofOz
New member
Um, it's tongue-in-cheek. Both Lamm and Victor Davis Hanson oppose illegal immigration.
It's sort of a journalistic Poe, then. No surprise there.
genuineoriginal
New member
Lamm was being sarcastic when he claimed that the Liberal Agenda was his plan.
That does not mean that he was not serious in his claim that the Liberal Agenda would destroy America.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
that's the way i read it :thumb:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
What "liberal agenda" would that be?
musterion
Well-known member
On the ride home I kept hearing hopeless Hannity drone on and on about how Democrats are naive and ignorant of how their policies will continue to lead toward the destruction of this nation. Either he's drunk, a stone idiot or he's controlled opposition who won't state the simple and obvious truth: they have known for decades exactly what they want to accomplish and how to go about doing it. It's all right there in the Manifesto and the philosophy of the der lange Marsch durch die Institutionen. What we've been seeing is just what you'd expect to see if godless tyranny was being systematically implemented at the highest levels of global power for over a hundred years.
Our problem is, Americans and too many in the West were lulled into believing it couldn't happen here. We'd fought too hard and had gained so much prosperity that it was unfathomable to think anyone could even WANT to bring it all down. Wrong. The very people who benefit the most from it want to replace it with something made in their own image. So for decades we've been engaged in a literal revolution that almost none of us even recognized as such. But the globalists' violent reaction to Trump (who is the stand in for us) is just the opening salvo in an about to be declared open war, because we cannot go like this. All sides know that sooner or later, something big has to break.
Our problem is, Americans and too many in the West were lulled into believing it couldn't happen here. We'd fought too hard and had gained so much prosperity that it was unfathomable to think anyone could even WANT to bring it all down. Wrong. The very people who benefit the most from it want to replace it with something made in their own image. So for decades we've been engaged in a literal revolution that almost none of us even recognized as such. But the globalists' violent reaction to Trump (who is the stand in for us) is just the opening salvo in an about to be declared open war, because we cannot go like this. All sides know that sooner or later, something big has to break.
genuineoriginal
New member
The "liberal agenda" is the plan of the liberals to destroy America, which Governor Richard Lamm sarcastically claimed to be his own plan to destroy America.
Gov. Richard Lamm: My plan to destroy America
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Oh, right. Oh noes, the sky will fall in next!
In reality news, most people, "liberal" or otherwise just get on with their lives...
Kit the Coyote
New member
I heard a congressman speaking on the radio driving home today, He said there is a centrist group of Republicans and Democrats that believe in border security and is more than willing to provide money for it if they were assured it was going to be spent on what is actually needed, as determined by experts, and not wasted just to fulfill a campaign promise.
Aimiel
Well-known member
“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American … There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag … We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language … and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”
Theodore Roosevelt 1907
Theodore Roosevelt 1907