|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On June 17 2018 08:34 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2018 07:56 Danglars wrote:On June 17 2018 07:29 PhoenixVoid wrote:On June 17 2018 07:24 IgnE wrote:On June 17 2018 07:01 KwarK wrote:On June 17 2018 06:46 Danglars wrote:On June 17 2018 05:56 JimmyJRaynor wrote:i really hope Justin Trudeau employs the tactics his father employed when Pierre Elliott Trudeau was dealing with Nixon.. Even if Justin does this... I don't think Justin has 10% of the intellect of his father. That said, P.E.T.'s approach was pragmatic and pure gold. In particular Pierre Trudeau refused to be labelled... "i'm not a protectionist.. i'm not a nationalist.. i'm not an isolationist... i just want the best deal for Canada.. lets make the best deal we can together... even if the rest of the world hates you ( meaning USA//Nixon) ... we want to make a good deal". http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/just-released-1971-recording-captures-talks-between-nixon-pompous-trudeau-1.755465Trump alienating the rest of the world is a great opportunity for Canada if Justin plays his cards right... He can’t do a visit to India right. He can’t affix his eyebrows to his face right. I don’t think he’ll play his cards right. I just think Trumps making it exceedingly easy for Trudeau to grow support domestically. Surely you're not buying the conspiracy theory that Trudeau doesn't have eyebrows, are you? That dark thing that sometimes appears behind an opaque object in the opposite direction to the light source, that's called a shadow. What is this conspiracy theory? https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/justin-trudeaus-eyebrow/During a G7 summit speech Trudeau made, there were some people saying Trudeau was wearing fake eyebrows because the shadows made it seem like the eyebrow was tilted, like it was glued on improperly. Unsurprisingly turned into fodder for the right who joked about him being as fake as his eyebrows, a ninny who is all show and no talk, etc. It was believable, given the absolutely bonkers photos. That’s if we’re being honest about appearances. But hey, if that was just shadows as people say now, then my bad. On June 17 2018 07:11 JimmiC wrote:On June 17 2018 06:46 Danglars wrote:On June 17 2018 05:56 JimmyJRaynor wrote:i really hope Justin Trudeau employs the tactics his father employed when Pierre Elliott Trudeau was dealing with Nixon.. Even if Justin does this... I don't think Justin has 10% of the intellect of his father. That said, P.E.T.'s approach was pragmatic and pure gold. In particular Pierre Trudeau refused to be labelled... "i'm not a protectionist.. i'm not a nationalist.. i'm not an isolationist... i just want the best deal for Canada.. lets make the best deal we can together... even if the rest of the world hates you ( meaning USA//Nixon) ... we want to make a good deal". http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/just-released-1971-recording-captures-talks-between-nixon-pompous-trudeau-1.755465Trump alienating the rest of the world is a great opportunity for Canada if Justin plays his cards right... He do a visit to India right. He can’t affix his eyebrows to his face right. I don’t think he’ll play his cards right. I just think Trumps making it exceedingly easy for Trudeau to grow support domestically. Everyone loves someone who "stands up" to a bully, and we have little brother complex relating to the states anyway. Too bad JT became leader because of his last name and not because of his talent. So the chances of him taking advantage of it, without excellent advisers, is slim to none. Yeah  Maybe Merkel or subordinates can coordinate a response that includes Canada. Video editing software exists and that video looks fake as fuck.
You should decide if your approach is “quite obviously shadow” or “video looks fake as fuck.” The second one lends credence to the results looking fake ... you just blame video editing instead of false eyebrows or deceptive shadows.
|
It is petty as it gets, but politics has always been about appearances, just like how people mock Trump's hairdo and orange tan today. Trudeau does have a reputation for being a bit too prepped for a photo op and often stumbling (metaphorically), and fake eyebrows wouldn't help with that. But hey, Danglars acknowledged he likely erred and sees the light of the eyebrow shadows, and I think there's better boards to discuss this, like in Canadian Politics : )
On June 17 2018 08:53 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2018 08:49 PhoenixVoid wrote:
It is petty as it gets, but politics has always been about appearances, just like how people mock Trump's hairdo and orange tan today. Trudeau does have a reputation for being a bit too prepped for a photo op and often stumbling (metaphorically), and fake eyebrows wouldn't help with that. But hey, Danglars acknowledged he likely erred and sees the light of the eyebrow shadows, and I think there's better boards to discuss this, like in Canadian Politics : ) Christ, seems more like r/conspiracy fodder to me.
Yes it is weird how far some people will go to hit Trudeau, like with faked quotes ("If you kill your enemies, they win"), and generally obsessing over how he's a "cuck" and not a macho man. They seem to conveniently forget he boxed out a pretty beefy Conservative senator years ago.
|
On June 17 2018 08:49 PhoenixVoid wrote:
It is petty as it gets, but politics has always been about appearances, just like how people mock Trump's hairdo and orange tan today. Trudeau does have a reputation for being a bit too prepped for a photo op and often stumbling (metaphorically), and fake eyebrows wouldn't help with that. But hey, Danglars acknowledged he likely erred and sees the light of the eyebrow shadows, and I think there's better boards to discuss this, like in Canadian Politics : )
Christ, seems more like r/conspiracy fodder to me.
|
From where I heard of the bizarre eyebrow thing, it came up during when the tariff, G7 and subsequent twitter cockfight were still top news (aka 2 weeks ago).
I get the feeling it was some weird chest-puffing from T_D. Like, look at the big alpha Trump pushing around that dandy Trudeau. Not really relevant to much, but overall a statement that trade wars are good because Trump is the biggest dog in the yard.
|
On June 17 2018 08:41 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2018 08:34 Plansix wrote:On June 17 2018 07:56 Danglars wrote:On June 17 2018 07:29 PhoenixVoid wrote:On June 17 2018 07:24 IgnE wrote:On June 17 2018 07:01 KwarK wrote:On June 17 2018 06:46 Danglars wrote:On June 17 2018 05:56 JimmyJRaynor wrote:i really hope Justin Trudeau employs the tactics his father employed when Pierre Elliott Trudeau was dealing with Nixon.. Even if Justin does this... I don't think Justin has 10% of the intellect of his father. That said, P.E.T.'s approach was pragmatic and pure gold. In particular Pierre Trudeau refused to be labelled... "i'm not a protectionist.. i'm not a nationalist.. i'm not an isolationist... i just want the best deal for Canada.. lets make the best deal we can together... even if the rest of the world hates you ( meaning USA//Nixon) ... we want to make a good deal". http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/just-released-1971-recording-captures-talks-between-nixon-pompous-trudeau-1.755465Trump alienating the rest of the world is a great opportunity for Canada if Justin plays his cards right... He can’t do a visit to India right. He can’t affix his eyebrows to his face right. I don’t think he’ll play his cards right. I just think Trumps making it exceedingly easy for Trudeau to grow support domestically. Surely you're not buying the conspiracy theory that Trudeau doesn't have eyebrows, are you? That dark thing that sometimes appears behind an opaque object in the opposite direction to the light source, that's called a shadow. What is this conspiracy theory? https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/justin-trudeaus-eyebrow/During a G7 summit speech Trudeau made, there were some people saying Trudeau was wearing fake eyebrows because the shadows made it seem like the eyebrow was tilted, like it was glued on improperly. Unsurprisingly turned into fodder for the right who joked about him being as fake as his eyebrows, a ninny who is all show and no talk, etc. It was believable, given the absolutely bonkers photos. That’s if we’re being honest about appearances. https://twitter.com/dailycallout/status/1005836637673345025But hey, if that was just shadows as people say now, then my bad. On June 17 2018 07:11 JimmiC wrote:On June 17 2018 06:46 Danglars wrote:On June 17 2018 05:56 JimmyJRaynor wrote:i really hope Justin Trudeau employs the tactics his father employed when Pierre Elliott Trudeau was dealing with Nixon.. Even if Justin does this... I don't think Justin has 10% of the intellect of his father. That said, P.E.T.'s approach was pragmatic and pure gold. In particular Pierre Trudeau refused to be labelled... "i'm not a protectionist.. i'm not a nationalist.. i'm not an isolationist... i just want the best deal for Canada.. lets make the best deal we can together... even if the rest of the world hates you ( meaning USA//Nixon) ... we want to make a good deal". http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/just-released-1971-recording-captures-talks-between-nixon-pompous-trudeau-1.755465Trump alienating the rest of the world is a great opportunity for Canada if Justin plays his cards right... He do a visit to India right. He can’t affix his eyebrows to his face right. I don’t think he’ll play his cards right. I just think Trumps making it exceedingly easy for Trudeau to grow support domestically. Everyone loves someone who "stands up" to a bully, and we have little brother complex relating to the states anyway. Too bad JT became leader because of his last name and not because of his talent. So the chances of him taking advantage of it, without excellent advisers, is slim to none. Yeah Maybe Merkel or subordinates can coordinate a response that includes Canada. Video editing software exists and that video looks fake as fuck. You should decide if your approach is “quite obviously shadow” or “video looks fake as fuck.” The second one lends credence to the results looking fake ... you just blame video editing instead of false eyebrows or deceptive shadows.
I think the approach is quite obviously "why does this matter?"
|
|
|
On June 17 2018 09:18 JimmiC wrote:
Depends on what you are interested. I've seen long articles about the first ladies outfits and what her body language means. Lots of people are interested in that shit, and there is a huge market out there for pretty boys/girls looking bad.
I get the sentiment that it shouldn't matter but it clearly does. Neither leader of the country made it their office based on their policy.
Oh, there's absolutely a market for it. And it can legit be amusing in a vacuum.
It's just utterly bizarre in the context of "We started a trade war with Canada. But don't worry, their leader has fake eyebrows."
|
On June 17 2018 09:18 JimmiC wrote:
Depends on what you are interested. I've seen long articles about the first ladies outfits and what her body language means. Lots of people are interested in that shit, and there is a huge market out there for pretty boys/girls looking bad.
I get the sentiment that it shouldn't matter but it clearly does. Neither leader of the country made it their office based on their policy.
I understand this well enough, but the decision to bring this up in the context of foreign policy is what I find particularly questionable.
|
Ted Cruz has defeated Jimmy Kimmel in basketball. This is both the least interesting and least surprising basketball result since Bill Simmons fellating of Brad Stevens on 5/30
|
On June 16 2018 13:43 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2018 12:13 mierin wrote:
Is whataboutism the new legal standard? Oh, Israel may be committing human rights violations, but X other country is too? How about we come down hard on Israel now, and once that is finished worry about the other countries? We need to come to a consensus that human rights violations are bad, and look into all instances of that. If Israel needs to be the "example" to the rest of the world, so be it.
There are a finite number of countries on this planet, so going through them one by one to eliminate stuff like this isn't impossible. I think the linked article and her op ed ( wapo) lay out the basic rationale well enough. If I made an example of you for the next twenty years or so, you also might suspect this is more about you than warning others.
No, that's an incorrect take. If i'm doing something reprehensible, I should be judged for that.
|
On June 17 2018 09:18 JimmiC wrote:
Depends on what you are interested. I've seen long articles about the first ladies outfits and what her body language means. Lots of people are interested in that shit, and there is a huge market out there for pretty boys/girls looking bad.
I get the sentiment that it shouldn't matter but it clearly does. Neither leader of the country made it their office based on their policy.
I have no problem if the zeitgeist is everybody talking about policies and nobody consorts with those low people. But we have the Drumpf posters here, the small hands, orange face, omg Melania outfit and heels, and the rest ... that get shocked we’re even talking about something that represents another’s naïveté. Yeah, people here have been talking at that level of discourse without realizing for quite some time (but I’m sure are justified in doing it because Trump), just look in the mirror a bit more.
It’s pretty funny to be honest.
|
On June 17 2018 11:34 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2018 09:18 JimmiC wrote:
Depends on what you are interested. I've seen long articles about the first ladies outfits and what her body language means. Lots of people are interested in that shit, and there is a huge market out there for pretty boys/girls looking bad.
I get the sentiment that it shouldn't matter but it clearly does. Neither leader of the country made it their office based on their policy. I have no problem if the zeitgeist is everybody talking about policies and nobody consorts with those low people. But we have the Drumpf posters here, the small hands, orange face, omg Melania outfit and heels, and the rest ... that get shocked we’re even talking about something that represents another’s naïveté. Yeah, people here have been talking at that level of discourse without realizing for quite some time (but I’m sure are justified in doing it because Trump), just look in the mirror a bit more. It’s pretty funny to be honest.
I mean, you had to outright ignore the following two posts just to get you jab in, so kudos? Pretty sure we had random posts here (or maybe on the Canada thread?) about Trudeau's bod, so I don't think anyone's above talking about random celeb rag gossip about their world leaders.
But you're the one who brought up fake eyebrows in the context of trade wars. I'd still love to know how you're connecting the two.
At least Trump's tantrums are legitimate discussion points when it comes to his foreign policy.
|
On June 17 2018 10:55 mierin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2018 13:43 Danglars wrote:On June 16 2018 12:13 mierin wrote:
Is whataboutism the new legal standard? Oh, Israel may be committing human rights violations, but X other country is too? How about we come down hard on Israel now, and once that is finished worry about the other countries? We need to come to a consensus that human rights violations are bad, and look into all instances of that. If Israel needs to be the "example" to the rest of the world, so be it.
There are a finite number of countries on this planet, so going through them one by one to eliminate stuff like this isn't impossible. I think the linked article and her op ed ( wapo) lay out the basic rationale well enough. If I made an example of you for the next twenty years or so, you also might suspect this is more about you than warning others. No, that's an incorrect take. If i'm doing something reprehensible, I should be judged for that.
If they’ve exhibited a clear pattern of behavior, only the lowest of stupid people would surmise that you’re being made an example for others. The rest will quickly realize some nations with more favorable geopolitical status or in quasi-alliances get preferential treatment. The problem with Israel and America under Trump is we’re not behaving like ignorant saps. Majority-Muslim autocracies and theocracies operate under a separate regime of human rights punishments.
The US is right to withdraw, and Obama was wrong to put us back in. His error in judgment has been corrected.
|
On June 17 2018 11:46 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2018 10:55 mierin wrote:On June 16 2018 13:43 Danglars wrote:On June 16 2018 12:13 mierin wrote:
Is whataboutism the new legal standard? Oh, Israel may be committing human rights violations, but X other country is too? How about we come down hard on Israel now, and once that is finished worry about the other countries? We need to come to a consensus that human rights violations are bad, and look into all instances of that. If Israel needs to be the "example" to the rest of the world, so be it.
There are a finite number of countries on this planet, so going through them one by one to eliminate stuff like this isn't impossible. I think the linked article and her op ed ( wapo) lay out the basic rationale well enough. If I made an example of you for the next twenty years or so, you also might suspect this is more about you than warning others. No, that's an incorrect take. If i'm doing something reprehensible, I should be judged for that. If they’ve exhibited a clear pattern of behavior, only the lowest of stupid people would surmise that you’re being made an example for others. The rest will quickly realize some nations with more favorable geopolitical status or in quasi-alliances get preferential treatment. The problem with Israel and America under Trump is we’re not behaving like ignorant saps. Majority-Muslim autocracies and theocracies operate under a separate regime of human rights punishments. The US is right to withdraw, and Obama was wrong to put us back in. His error in judgment has been corrected.
I think our ignorance as a nation is on full display. From human rights to eyebrow conspiracy theories, we are all about ignorant shit.
|
On June 17 2018 11:42 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2018 11:34 Danglars wrote:On June 17 2018 09:18 JimmiC wrote:
Depends on what you are interested. I've seen long articles about the first ladies outfits and what her body language means. Lots of people are interested in that shit, and there is a huge market out there for pretty boys/girls looking bad.
I get the sentiment that it shouldn't matter but it clearly does. Neither leader of the country made it their office based on their policy. I have no problem if the zeitgeist is everybody talking about policies and nobody consorts with those low people. But we have the Drumpf posters here, the small hands, orange face, omg Melania outfit and heels, and the rest ... that get shocked we’re even talking about something that represents another’s naïveté. Yeah, people here have been talking at that level of discourse without realizing for quite some time (but I’m sure are justified in doing it because Trump), just look in the mirror a bit more. It’s pretty funny to be honest. I mean, you had to outright ignore the following two posts just to get you jab in, so kudos? Pretty sure we had random posts here (or maybe on the Canada thread?) about Trudeau's bod, so I don't think anyone's above talking about random celeb rag gossip about their world leaders. But you're the one who brought up fake eyebrows in the context of trade wars. I'd still love to know how you're connecting the two. At least Trump's tantrums are legitimate discussion points when it comes to his foreign policy.
I mean you’ve ignored the context of my reply and the substance of my further reply, so you can keep all the kudos. This is squarely in the genre of selective misinterpretation. Maybe you’d understand “Bush shouldn’t set nuclear policy, he can barely even pronounce the word!” but not “He can’t even even do an India trip or his own eyebrows right, how can he play his cards just right?”
I’d expect a tiny bit more levity from people do committed to making fun of Trump—making sarcastic comments at Trump—but I guess that’s a big ask? I don’t know, it was really only two or three posters.
|
On June 17 2018 12:01 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2018 11:42 WolfintheSheep wrote:On June 17 2018 11:34 Danglars wrote:On June 17 2018 09:18 JimmiC wrote:
Depends on what you are interested. I've seen long articles about the first ladies outfits and what her body language means. Lots of people are interested in that shit, and there is a huge market out there for pretty boys/girls looking bad.
I get the sentiment that it shouldn't matter but it clearly does. Neither leader of the country made it their office based on their policy. I have no problem if the zeitgeist is everybody talking about policies and nobody consorts with those low people. But we have the Drumpf posters here, the small hands, orange face, omg Melania outfit and heels, and the rest ... that get shocked we’re even talking about something that represents another’s naïveté. Yeah, people here have been talking at that level of discourse without realizing for quite some time (but I’m sure are justified in doing it because Trump), just look in the mirror a bit more. It’s pretty funny to be honest. I mean, you had to outright ignore the following two posts just to get you jab in, so kudos? Pretty sure we had random posts here (or maybe on the Canada thread?) about Trudeau's bod, so I don't think anyone's above talking about random celeb rag gossip about their world leaders. But you're the one who brought up fake eyebrows in the context of trade wars. I'd still love to know how you're connecting the two. At least Trump's tantrums are legitimate discussion points when it comes to his foreign policy. I mean you’ve ignored the context of my reply and the substance of my further reply, so you can keep all the kudos. This is squarely in the genre of selective misinterpretation. Maybe you’d understand “Bush shouldn’t set nuclear policy, he can barely even pronounce the word!” but not “He can’t even even do an India trip or his own eyebrows right, how can he play his cards just right?” I’d expect a tiny bit more levity from people do committed to making fun of Trump—making sarcastic comments at Trump—but I guess that’s a big ask? I don’t know, it was really only two or three posters.
Well, here's the thing. Now I can't tell if you're including the India trip in the levity or not, because that was actually a decently big fuck-up from Trudeau.
|
On June 17 2018 11:42 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2018 11:34 Danglars wrote:On June 17 2018 09:18 JimmiC wrote:
Depends on what you are interested. I've seen long articles about the first ladies outfits and what her body language means. Lots of people are interested in that shit, and there is a huge market out there for pretty boys/girls looking bad.
I get the sentiment that it shouldn't matter but it clearly does. Neither leader of the country made it their office based on their policy. I have no problem if the zeitgeist is everybody talking about policies and nobody consorts with those low people. But we have the Drumpf posters here, the small hands, orange face, omg Melania outfit and heels, and the rest ... that get shocked we’re even talking about something that represents another’s naïveté. Yeah, people here have been talking at that level of discourse without realizing for quite some time (but I’m sure are justified in doing it because Trump), just look in the mirror a bit more. It’s pretty funny to be honest. Pretty sure we had random posts here (or maybe on the Canada thread?) about Trudeau's bod
So i heard that Trudeau works out and has a pretty good body. I think I saw a picture on here but i cant find it.
I tried googling image "trudeau's body" but i couldn't find it.
I want to see pictures of his nice body, anybody have it?
|
On June 17 2018 12:01 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2018 11:42 WolfintheSheep wrote:On June 17 2018 11:34 Danglars wrote:On June 17 2018 09:18 JimmiC wrote:
Depends on what you are interested. I've seen long articles about the first ladies outfits and what her body language means. Lots of people are interested in that shit, and there is a huge market out there for pretty boys/girls looking bad.
I get the sentiment that it shouldn't matter but it clearly does. Neither leader of the country made it their office based on their policy. I have no problem if the zeitgeist is everybody talking about policies and nobody consorts with those low people. But we have the Drumpf posters here, the small hands, orange face, omg Melania outfit and heels, and the rest ... that get shocked we’re even talking about something that represents another’s naïveté. Yeah, people here have been talking at that level of discourse without realizing for quite some time (but I’m sure are justified in doing it because Trump), just look in the mirror a bit more. It’s pretty funny to be honest. I mean, you had to outright ignore the following two posts just to get you jab in, so kudos? Pretty sure we had random posts here (or maybe on the Canada thread?) about Trudeau's bod, so I don't think anyone's above talking about random celeb rag gossip about their world leaders. But you're the one who brought up fake eyebrows in the context of trade wars. I'd still love to know how you're connecting the two. At least Trump's tantrums are legitimate discussion points when it comes to his foreign policy. I mean you’ve ignored the context of my reply and the substance of my further reply, so you can keep all the kudos. This is squarely in the genre of selective misinterpretation. Maybe you’d understand “Bush shouldn’t set nuclear policy, he can barely even pronounce the word!” but not “He can’t even even do an India trip or his own eyebrows right, how can he play his cards just right?” I’d expect a tiny bit more levity from people do committed to making fun of Trump—making sarcastic comments at Trump—but I guess that’s a big ask? I don’t know, it was really only two or three posters.
It's one thing if you're arguing Trudeau can't handle foreign policy, it's another to support that argument by arguing the finer details about whether his eyebrows are real. If you're saying it in jest, own it my dude.
|
On June 17 2018 05:49 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Because it didn't happen under Obama? I don't know what "this" you're referring to, but if you're attempting to do some all encompassing absolute that "tell me children were never ever separated from parents under Obama", okay, take your internet kudos or something.
There are legitimate and justifiable reasons to separate children from parents. Medical reasons, child abuse, etc. And that's not even discussing border crossers or immigrants. I would've hoped that such points could be skipped over as standard fact.
So someone told me false information, I point out that it's false, and you mock that with "take your internet kudos or something"? Do you prefer I overlook or propagate false information that looks more favorable to your preferred political party?
I'm entirely open to there being legitimate and justifiable reasons to reasons to separate children from parents. Perhaps you'll consider explaining that to this guy..
On June 16 2018 05:45 Plansix wrote:
The rest of the questions: there is no justification for splitting up the families. It is purely done to inflict suffering on those seeking asylum to discourage other asylum seekers and to discourage the parents from fighting their deportation.
Given that they've both done it, I'm curious about the ethics of the practice in general, and what the differences in context are that justify the current outrage.
On June 16 2018 04:17 PeTraSoHot wrote:
Are you wanting them to be put in the same prison / cell / detainment facility as their parents? What explanation has there been for why we wouldn't do that? Are you unhappy about the quality of the accommodations? I'm not really sure what exactly your complaint is.
I'm not getting far in terms of real answers. Your comment "Because it didn't happen under Obama?...(okay it did happen under Obama, but his reasons were legitimate!)" is just dishonest.
Again, I'm open to there being legitimate or justifiable reasons (perhaps Obama's were and Trump's are not), but nobody is presenting them and I'm getting lies instead. It's getting difficult to not think this is a manufactured outrage...
|
On June 17 2018 12:46 PeTraSoHot wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2018 05:49 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Because it didn't happen under Obama? I don't know what "this" you're referring to, but if you're attempting to do some all encompassing absolute that "tell me children were never ever separated from parents under Obama", okay, take your internet kudos or something.
There are legitimate and justifiable reasons to separate children from parents. Medical reasons, child abuse, etc. And that's not even discussing border crossers or immigrants. I would've hoped that such points could be skipped over as standard fact. So someone told me false information, I point out that it's false, and you mock that with "take your internet kudos or something"? Do you prefer I overlook or propagate false information that looks more favorable to your preferred political party? I'm entirely open to there being legitimate and justifiable reasons to reasons to separate children from parents. Perhaps you'll consider explaining that to this guy.. Show nested quote +On June 16 2018 05:45 Plansix wrote:
The rest of the questions: there is no justification for splitting up the families. It is purely done to inflict suffering on those seeking asylum to discourage other asylum seekers and to discourage the parents from fighting their deportation. Given that they've both done it, I'm curious about the ethics of the practice in general, and what the differences in context are that justify the current outrage. Show nested quote +On June 16 2018 04:17 PeTraSoHot wrote:
Are you wanting them to be put in the same prison / cell / detainment facility as their parents? What explanation has there been for why we wouldn't do that? Are you unhappy about the quality of the accommodations? I'm not really sure what exactly your complaint is. I'm not getting far in terms of real answers. Your comment "Because it didn't happen under Obama?...(okay it did happen under Obama, but his reasons were legitimate!)" is just dishonest. Again, I'm open to there being legitimate or justifiable reasons, but nobody is presenting them and I'm getting lies instead. It's getting difficult to not think this is a manufactured outrage...
Read your own articles then. If you don't understand the difference between "rare and in extreme circumstances" and "standard operating procedure", then there's not much point trying to have a discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
