|
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 |
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2025/10/03/jones-texts-virginia-attorney-general/
"“If those guys die before me I will go to their funerals to piss on their graves. … Send them out awash in something,” Jones wrote to Republican House Del. Carrie Coyner"
"Jones then mused about a scenario in which he had two bullets and could choose to fire them at Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot — the brutal Cambodian dictator — or then-House Speaker Todd Gilbert (R).
“Spoiler: put Gilbert in the crew with the two worst people you know and he receives both bullets every time,” Jones wrote, according to the screenshot."
" “You weren’t trying to understand,” Coyner texted. “You were talking about hopping [sic] jennifer Gilbert’s children would die”
“Yes, I’ve told you this before,” Jones replied. “Only when people feel pain personally do they move on policy.” "
Last quote is really cream of the top:
" “Virginians deserve honest leaders who admit when they are wrong and own up to their mistakes,” he continued. “This was a grave mistake and I will work every day to prove to the people of Virginia that I will fight for them as Attorney General.” "
The least he could do to "own up to their mistakes" would be dropping from the race, not trying to spin his derangement into some sort of virtue.
|
United States43069 Posts
On October 06 2025 02:49 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 01:28 Billyboy wrote:
@oblade Can you explain the logic to sending the national guard and ice to Portland when the entire state of Oregon has just over 100k illegals. You have states like Texas with 1.6 million and Florida with 1 million and those states voted for Trump so he wouldn't get nearly the amount of push back.
Wouldn't it make way more sense from a resource and efficiency stand point to get those states cleared out, show how much better they are because of it and then go after the tiny ones that have insignificant amounts?
Does this not make it look like the goal has nothing to do with getting rid of illegals? Isn't it rather obvious? He sends national guard, where conditions prevent ICE from doing its job.
But isn't ICE's job where the illegal immigrants are? The condition preventing ICE from doing its job in Portland is that Portland is a thousand mile from the jobsite. Unless the national guard plan to move Portland there’s not much that they can do.
|
Razyda, I think you mean "cream of the crop".
|
Northern Ireland25819 Posts
On October 06 2025 03:18 Razyda wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2025/10/03/jones-texts-virginia-attorney-general/"“If those guys die before me I will go to their funerals to piss on their graves. … Send them out awash in something,” Jones wrote to Republican House Del. Carrie Coyner" "Jones then mused about a scenario in which he had two bullets and could choose to fire them at Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot — the brutal Cambodian dictator — or then-House Speaker Todd Gilbert (R). “Spoiler: put Gilbert in the crew with the two worst people you know and he receives both bullets every time,” Jones wrote, according to the screenshot." " “You weren’t trying to understand,” Coyner texted. “You were talking about hopping [sic] jennifer Gilbert’s children would die” “Yes, I’ve told you this before,” Jones replied. “Only when people feel pain personally do they move on policy.” " Last quote is really cream of the top: " “Virginians deserve honest leaders who admit when they are wrong and own up to their mistakes,” he continued. “This was a grave mistake and I will work every day to prove to the people of Virginia that I will fight for them as Attorney General.” " The least he could do to "own up to their mistakes" would be dropping from the race, not trying to spin his derangement into some sort of virtue.
Do you care? Does anyone at this point?
|
I’m trying to decide if the current troop and secret police deployments can be described as a Terror or not. It’s certainly an extralegal use of state power with the explicit purpose of intimidating dissenting voices, and they’ve even killed some citizens who didn’t commit any crime. But I mean, it’s certainly got nothing on the French Revolution, which is what you’re invoking when you call something a Terror.
That said, I think it’s worth trying to look a little into the future. The far right has executed purges within the federal government; they’re actively engaged in a trade war with basically the entire planet; they’re deploying troops to intimidate and punish domestic opposition. What’s next, though? What does escalation from here look like?
Suppressing domestic opposition is obviously the direction they’re signaling. The Comey prosecution is a trial balloon, if that doesn’t get them too much pushback we’ll surely see more of that against Adam Schiff, maybe Hillary or Fauci or some media people. I don’t think it’s really gonna work though. It’s kind of hard to overstate the weakness of their case against Comey, and no amount of DOJ purges can guarantee them a friendly jury. Steven Miller also keeps gesturing in the direction of designating a broad spectrum of opposition (including, like, lower court judges ruling against the administration) as terrorism, presumably with the threat of rounding those people up and jailing them or something. But like, I don’t think I believe them? I think if they thought they could jail the whole Democratic Party or something they would have done it by now.
Then there’s the international front. Historically when a government turns autocratic it’s only a matter of time before things turn to war, and I don’t want to totally discount the possibility we end up there. For the moment though it seems a bit unlikely. What are we gonna do, invade Iraq again? Iran maybe? Trump has made a lot of noise about annexing Canada or Greenland but I think it’s pretty unlikely they’d be willing to actually invade. Of course circumstances could change, and it’s bearish that they’re so happy to blow up random boats with absolutely no provocation or legal basis whatsoever. But I think for the moment, getting bogged down in real prolonged military engagement somewhere seems unlikely.
A couple big things on the horizon might change the calculus though. One is economic recession. I actually think a lot of people in the thread (including me) are pretty surprised the tariffs haven’t brought more economic devastation than they have so far. One theory I’ve heard is that the economy is being buoyed by massive investment in an AI bubble. If you take the Ed Zitron view, that bubble is likely to burst any time now, and it’s hard to overstate the ripple effects that would have. What does all this look like in a global recession? Do the trade wars diminish or intensify? Does economic desperation weaken Trump’s despotic pushes or embolden them?
The other big threat is some massive event on the world stage. China invading Taiwan, or the Israel-Palestine conflict escalating into a broader war in the region would be massively destabilizing. Europe has been re-militarizing for several years now, and some conclusion to the Ukraine conflict will happen eventually. In the one direction that could mean a weakened and economically devastated Russia; in the other it would mean an emboldened Russia increasingly willing to invade and annex its neighbors. I’m far from an expert on any of those areas, so I don’t really have an idea how likely it is something happens in the next, say, couple years. But those kinds of world-shaking events have the potential to alter the landscape and change what an aspiring despot can and can’t get away with.
|
United States43069 Posts
I'm pretty sure "we have to kill their families" was part of Trump's official platform. Also there's a very clear pattern with conservatives where they only understand why a given thing is wrong when it happens to them, such as when they're victims of police brutality or when they have close family members who come out as gay. Obviously I'd prefer if they could learn some other way, it ought not to be necessary for them to need to see their own children killed before they understand the problem with Trump's platform of "we have to kill their families". It's not good. But given that it is the method of education that they themselves have chosen I don't really see any issue with them experiencing the world they created. I didn't want it. I voted against it. They wanted it. They voted for it.
Edit: it reminds me I saw of a video of a redhat crying about his business failing because of tariffs and his main issue was the cruelty of the left and how they all wanted his business to fail. How hateful they were and how they wanted him to suffer. The left who campaigned against the tariffs that killed his business. Warned against the tariffs. Voted against the tariffs. In his view these are the people who wanted this. Whereas he, who vocally supported the tariffs and voted it, did not want his business to fail. But now that people are saying “I told you so” apparently those people are hate filled and want Americans to fail.
The left campaigned on saving everyone, socialists, liberals, and conservatives. The right campaigned on fucking everyone. And yet after getting exactly what they voted for they still insist that it’s the left’s fault.
|
On October 06 2025 02:35 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 01:28 Billyboy wrote:
@oblade Can you explain the logic to sending the national guard and ice to Portland when the entire state of Oregon has just over 100k illegals. They're different reasons. The reason for "sending" ICE is ICE's nationwide mission is immigration enforcement. Oregon is part of the nation. + Show Spoiler +Your 100k number is years old, and you don't know Texas and Oregon have different total populations. But estimate-splitting aside I get the implication. Only 100,000 people are living in the state with no permission whatsoever. Imagine how much fewer would be there without sanctuary policies. The reason for sending the national guard to Portland is Portland PD abandons law enforcement duties and doesn't secure or respond to areas outside where federal agents operate. Similar situation in Chicago where Democratic authorities order CPD to hang federal agents out to dry.Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 01:28 Billyboy wrote:
You have states like Texas with 1.6 million and Florida with 1 million and those states voted for Trump so he wouldn't get nearly the amount of push back. You think ICE doesn't operate in Texas or Florida? After you saw a map listing ICE facilities in states nationwide, with Texas topping the list. And still produced this question. At a certain point I can't help you. ICE operates even more efficiently in Texas and Florida because those states engage in even basic cooperation with federal enforcement. Yet Florida opened a detention facility and people call it a concentration camp. There's always "pushback." Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 01:28 Billyboy wrote:
Wouldn't it make way more sense from a resource and efficiency stand point to get those states cleared out, show how much better they are because of it and then go after the tiny ones that have insignificant amounts?
Does this not make it look like the goal has nothing to do with getting rid of illegals? Federal law applies nationwide. Would it be efficient to specifically close existing offices and detention centers in Oregon, mothball existing infrastructure, and tell everyone who works in Oregon to move to Texas until Texas has not a single illegal alien left? No. Would it be smart policy to let sanctuary Democrats have little corners of lawlessness where they get away with whatever they want? Also no.
On October 06 2025 02:49 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 01:28 Billyboy wrote:
@oblade Can you explain the logic to sending the national guard and ice to Portland when the entire state of Oregon has just over 100k illegals. You have states like Texas with 1.6 million and Florida with 1 million and those states voted for Trump so he wouldn't get nearly the amount of push back.
Wouldn't it make way more sense from a resource and efficiency stand point to get those states cleared out, show how much better they are because of it and then go after the tiny ones that have insignificant amounts?
Does this not make it look like the goal has nothing to do with getting rid of illegals? Isn't it rather obvious? He sends national guard, where conditions prevent ICE from doing its job.
You guys are missing the point, I'm not sure if it is on purpose. Why would you send out resources in this fashion? You would send them to where the biggest problem is so you could get the most illegals.
On top of that if you believe this is good for the country you would want to do it where you have support and can make it better for your supporters. Trump has made it very clear Dems are his enemies and he has no interest in helping them.
But now he is wasting valuable resources, to get a pittance of value, to help his enemies cities be better?
And do you think the national guard is free? Does it generate any money for the economy or is it just a drag on tax dollars? Wasn't one of the big reasons people voted Trump for the economy and to lessen government waste? Is this not the exact opposite? Are you all done even pretending you care about this kind of stuff?
|
On October 06 2025 03:38 KwarK wrote:
I'm pretty sure "we have to kill their families" was part of Trump's official platform. Also there's a very clear pattern with conservatives where they only understand why a given thing is wrong when it happens to them, such as when they're victims of police brutality or when they have close family members who come out as gay. Obviously I'd prefer if they could learn some other way, it ought not to be necessary for them to need to see their own children killed before they understand the problem with Trump's platform of "we have to kill their families". It's not good. But given that it is the method of education that they themselves have chosen I don't really see any issue with them experiencing the world they created. I didn't want it. I voted against it. They wanted it. They voted for it.
You seem to think that there is another way for them other than it happening to them before they can understand it, like it is a choice. This is false, the understanding before the experience is an alien language they'll never understand. That's like explaining the taste of an apple before letting someone taste it.
|
United States43069 Posts
On October 06 2025 03:55 Uldridge wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 03:38 KwarK wrote:
I'm pretty sure "we have to kill their families" was part of Trump's official platform. Also there's a very clear pattern with conservatives where they only understand why a given thing is wrong when it happens to them, such as when they're victims of police brutality or when they have close family members who come out as gay. Obviously I'd prefer if they could learn some other way, it ought not to be necessary for them to need to see their own children killed before they understand the problem with Trump's platform of "we have to kill their families". It's not good. But given that it is the method of education that they themselves have chosen I don't really see any issue with them experiencing the world they created. I didn't want it. I voted against it. They wanted it. They voted for it. You seem to think that there is another way for them other than it happening to them before they can understand it, like it is a choice. This is false, the understanding before the experience is an alien language they'll never understand. That's like explaining the taste of an apple before letting someone taste it.
“Beware the sin of empathy”
|
I know many Conservatives that postured as frightened victims after charlie kirk was shot, even though they were laughing when Nancy Pelosis husband was attacked, the Gretchen Whitmer hostage plot, or claimed that haitians were out eating dogs. Now 'their community is under attack'.
Fuck fascists, thats all modern american conservatism is at this point.
|
On October 06 2025 03:43 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 02:35 oBlade wrote:On October 06 2025 01:28 Billyboy wrote:
@oblade Can you explain the logic to sending the national guard and ice to Portland when the entire state of Oregon has just over 100k illegals. They're different reasons. The reason for "sending" ICE is ICE's nationwide mission is immigration enforcement. Oregon is part of the nation. + Show Spoiler +Your 100k number is years old, and you don't know Texas and Oregon have different total populations. But estimate-splitting aside I get the implication. Only 100,000 people are living in the state with no permission whatsoever. Imagine how much fewer would be there without sanctuary policies. The reason for sending the national guard to Portland is Portland PD abandons law enforcement duties and doesn't secure or respond to areas outside where federal agents operate. Similar situation in Chicago where Democratic authorities order CPD to hang federal agents out to dry.On October 06 2025 01:28 Billyboy wrote:
You have states like Texas with 1.6 million and Florida with 1 million and those states voted for Trump so he wouldn't get nearly the amount of push back. You think ICE doesn't operate in Texas or Florida? After you saw a map listing ICE facilities in states nationwide, with Texas topping the list. And still produced this question. At a certain point I can't help you. ICE operates even more efficiently in Texas and Florida because those states engage in even basic cooperation with federal enforcement. Yet Florida opened a detention facility and people call it a concentration camp. There's always "pushback." On October 06 2025 01:28 Billyboy wrote:
Wouldn't it make way more sense from a resource and efficiency stand point to get those states cleared out, show how much better they are because of it and then go after the tiny ones that have insignificant amounts?
Does this not make it look like the goal has nothing to do with getting rid of illegals? Federal law applies nationwide. Would it be efficient to specifically close existing offices and detention centers in Oregon, mothball existing infrastructure, and tell everyone who works in Oregon to move to Texas until Texas has not a single illegal alien left? No. Would it be smart policy to let sanctuary Democrats have little corners of lawlessness where they get away with whatever they want? Also no. Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 02:49 Razyda wrote:On October 06 2025 01:28 Billyboy wrote:
@oblade Can you explain the logic to sending the national guard and ice to Portland when the entire state of Oregon has just over 100k illegals. You have states like Texas with 1.6 million and Florida with 1 million and those states voted for Trump so he wouldn't get nearly the amount of push back.
Wouldn't it make way more sense from a resource and efficiency stand point to get those states cleared out, show how much better they are because of it and then go after the tiny ones that have insignificant amounts?
Does this not make it look like the goal has nothing to do with getting rid of illegals? Isn't it rather obvious? He sends national guard, where conditions prevent ICE from doing its job. You guys are missing the point, I'm not sure if it is on purpose. Why would you send out resources in this fashion? You would send them to where the biggest problem is so you could get the most illegals.
*points to the map again*
The resources are where the biggest problems are.
If, for argument's sake, your personal news feed were 80% "Blumpf did a fascism in Portland" and 20% "Blumpf did a fascism in Chicago" and you're therefore wondering why he hasn't "sent" ICE somewhere else, we are not dealing with a factual question, but a problem of skewed reporting combined with inadequate media literacy. The headline you might read of "ICE arrested 40 in Chicago" is not a full description of reality. It does not mean "0 arrested in Texas and Florida."
On October 06 2025 03:43 Billyboy wrote:
On top of that if you believe this is good for the country you would want to do it where you have support and can make it better for your supporters. Trump has made it very clear Dems are his enemies and he has no interest in helping them.
But now he is wasting valuable resources, to get a pittance of value, to help his enemies cities be better?
The President of the United States would enforce the law regardless of how a state voted for him or how its elected morons shat on him. By the logic of your own incomprehensible layers of gymnastic irony that you have set up that you don't believe, you should be praising his selflessness and encouraging more of it. You aren't. Your convincing power drops to 0.
On October 06 2025 03:43 Billyboy wrote:
And do you think the national guard is free? Does it generate any money for the economy or is it just a drag on tax dollars? Wasn't one of the big reasons people voted Trump for the economy and to lessen government waste? Is this not the exact opposite? Are you all done even pretending you care about this kind of stuff?
A sign on my street fell down so I called the Department of Transportation and they fixed it. It generated $0 for the economy. They did it because it's the government's job.
Arresting people who break the law is the government's job. There is no "wait for a peer reviewed study that confirms this creates more economic dollars than were invested into it." Arresting people is not an economic program. Arresting people can be an economic negative and you should still do it. If Elon Musk machinegunned Central Park, you should hang him. Regardless of how much it would crash the NASDAQ. Asinine concern trolling.
|
United States43069 Posts
Oblade here promoting law and order in between simping for Trump. That’s a good one. It’d be terrible if someone broke the law and went unpunished. Can’t be having that. Oblade just believes all law must be enforced, in all circumstances, just how it is. That means that he doesn’t have to defend whether it makes sense to enforce in this instance, he’s just an absolutist on this one, all laws.
|
On October 06 2025 04:31 KwarK wrote:
Oblade here promoting law and order in between simping for Trump. That’s a good one. It’d be terrible if someone broke the law and went unpunished. Can’t be having that. Oblade just believes all law must be enforced, in all circumstances, just how it is. That means that he doesn’t have to defend whether it makes sense to enforce in this instance, he’s just an absolutist on this one, all laws.
It makes sense to enforce in this instance.
|
United States43069 Posts
On October 06 2025 04:39 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 04:31 KwarK wrote:
Oblade here promoting law and order in between simping for Trump. That’s a good one. It’d be terrible if someone broke the law and went unpunished. Can’t be having that. Oblade just believes all law must be enforced, in all circumstances, just how it is. That means that he doesn’t have to defend whether it makes sense to enforce in this instance, he’s just an absolutist on this one, all laws. It makes sense to enforce in this instance.
No no no. Arresting people who break the law is the government’s job.
|
On October 06 2025 03:34 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 03:18 Razyda wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2025/10/03/jones-texts-virginia-attorney-general/"“If those guys die before me I will go to their funerals to piss on their graves. … Send them out awash in something,” Jones wrote to Republican House Del. Carrie Coyner" "Jones then mused about a scenario in which he had two bullets and could choose to fire them at Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot — the brutal Cambodian dictator — or then-House Speaker Todd Gilbert (R). “Spoiler: put Gilbert in the crew with the two worst people you know and he receives both bullets every time,” Jones wrote, according to the screenshot." " “You weren’t trying to understand,” Coyner texted. “You were talking about hopping [sic] jennifer Gilbert’s children would die” “Yes, I’ve told you this before,” Jones replied. “Only when people feel pain personally do they move on policy.” " Last quote is really cream of the top: " “Virginians deserve honest leaders who admit when they are wrong and own up to their mistakes,” he continued. “This was a grave mistake and I will work every day to prove to the people of Virginia that I will fight for them as Attorney General.” " The least he could do to "own up to their mistakes" would be dropping from the race, not trying to spin his derangement into some sort of virtue. Do you care? Does anyone at this point?
Just a page back Rayzda was saying that Trump should tweet that he's declaring war on California.
It's not even hypocrisy anymore, it's just blatant lying.
|
On October 06 2025 04:06 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 03:55 Uldridge wrote:On October 06 2025 03:38 KwarK wrote:
I'm pretty sure "we have to kill their families" was part of Trump's official platform. Also there's a very clear pattern with conservatives where they only understand why a given thing is wrong when it happens to them, such as when they're victims of police brutality or when they have close family members who come out as gay. Obviously I'd prefer if they could learn some other way, it ought not to be necessary for them to need to see their own children killed before they understand the problem with Trump's platform of "we have to kill their families". It's not good. But given that it is the method of education that they themselves have chosen I don't really see any issue with them experiencing the world they created. I didn't want it. I voted against it. They wanted it. They voted for it. You seem to think that there is another way for them other than it happening to them before they can understand it, like it is a choice. This is false, the understanding before the experience is an alien language they'll never understand. That's like explaining the taste of an apple before letting someone taste it. “Beware the sin of empathy”
I still can't get around the fact that that is not a line from Warhammer 40k.
|
Northern Ireland25819 Posts
On October 06 2025 05:31 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 04:06 KwarK wrote:On October 06 2025 03:55 Uldridge wrote:On October 06 2025 03:38 KwarK wrote:
I'm pretty sure "we have to kill their families" was part of Trump's official platform. Also there's a very clear pattern with conservatives where they only understand why a given thing is wrong when it happens to them, such as when they're victims of police brutality or when they have close family members who come out as gay. Obviously I'd prefer if they could learn some other way, it ought not to be necessary for them to need to see their own children killed before they understand the problem with Trump's platform of "we have to kill their families". It's not good. But given that it is the method of education that they themselves have chosen I don't really see any issue with them experiencing the world they created. I didn't want it. I voted against it. They wanted it. They voted for it. You seem to think that there is another way for them other than it happening to them before they can understand it, like it is a choice. This is false, the understanding before the experience is an alien language they'll never understand. That's like explaining the taste of an apple before letting someone taste it. “Beware the sin of empathy” I still can't get around the fact that that is not a line from Warhammer 40k.
‘Innocence proves nothing’ is on the other hand, and that feels depressingly fitting too
|
On October 06 2025 04:12 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 03:43 Billyboy wrote:On October 06 2025 02:35 oBlade wrote:On October 06 2025 01:28 Billyboy wrote:
@oblade Can you explain the logic to sending the national guard and ice to Portland when the entire state of Oregon has just over 100k illegals. They're different reasons. The reason for "sending" ICE is ICE's nationwide mission is immigration enforcement. Oregon is part of the nation. + Show Spoiler +Your 100k number is years old, and you don't know Texas and Oregon have different total populations. But estimate-splitting aside I get the implication. Only 100,000 people are living in the state with no permission whatsoever. Imagine how much fewer would be there without sanctuary policies. The reason for sending the national guard to Portland is Portland PD abandons law enforcement duties and doesn't secure or respond to areas outside where federal agents operate. Similar situation in Chicago where Democratic authorities order CPD to hang federal agents out to dry.On October 06 2025 01:28 Billyboy wrote:
You have states like Texas with 1.6 million and Florida with 1 million and those states voted for Trump so he wouldn't get nearly the amount of push back. You think ICE doesn't operate in Texas or Florida? After you saw a map listing ICE facilities in states nationwide, with Texas topping the list. And still produced this question. At a certain point I can't help you. ICE operates even more efficiently in Texas and Florida because those states engage in even basic cooperation with federal enforcement. Yet Florida opened a detention facility and people call it a concentration camp. There's always "pushback." On October 06 2025 01:28 Billyboy wrote:
Wouldn't it make way more sense from a resource and efficiency stand point to get those states cleared out, show how much better they are because of it and then go after the tiny ones that have insignificant amounts?
Does this not make it look like the goal has nothing to do with getting rid of illegals? Federal law applies nationwide. Would it be efficient to specifically close existing offices and detention centers in Oregon, mothball existing infrastructure, and tell everyone who works in Oregon to move to Texas until Texas has not a single illegal alien left? No. Would it be smart policy to let sanctuary Democrats have little corners of lawlessness where they get away with whatever they want? Also no. On October 06 2025 02:49 Razyda wrote:On October 06 2025 01:28 Billyboy wrote:
@oblade Can you explain the logic to sending the national guard and ice to Portland when the entire state of Oregon has just over 100k illegals. You have states like Texas with 1.6 million and Florida with 1 million and those states voted for Trump so he wouldn't get nearly the amount of push back.
Wouldn't it make way more sense from a resource and efficiency stand point to get those states cleared out, show how much better they are because of it and then go after the tiny ones that have insignificant amounts?
Does this not make it look like the goal has nothing to do with getting rid of illegals? Isn't it rather obvious? He sends national guard, where conditions prevent ICE from doing its job. You guys are missing the point, I'm not sure if it is on purpose. Why would you send out resources in this fashion? You would send them to where the biggest problem is so you could get the most illegals. *points to the map again* The resources are where the biggest problems are. If, for argument's sake, your personal news feed were 80% "Blumpf did a fascism in Portland" and 20% "Blumpf did a fascism in Chicago" and you're therefore wondering why he hasn't "sent" ICE somewhere else, we are not dealing with a factual question, but a problem of skewed reporting combined with inadequate media literacy. The headline you might read of "ICE arrested 40 in Chicago" is not a full description of reality. It does not mean "0 arrested in Texas and Florida." Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 03:43 Billyboy wrote:
On top of that if you believe this is good for the country you would want to do it where you have support and can make it better for your supporters. Trump has made it very clear Dems are his enemies and he has no interest in helping them.
But now he is wasting valuable resources, to get a pittance of value, to help his enemies cities be better? The President of the United States would enforce the law regardless of how a state voted for him or how its elected morons shat on him. By the logic of your own incomprehensible layers of gymnastic irony that you have set up that you don't believe, you should be praising his selflessness and encouraging more of it. You aren't. Your convincing power drops to 0. Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 03:43 Billyboy wrote:
And do you think the national guard is free? Does it generate any money for the economy or is it just a drag on tax dollars? Wasn't one of the big reasons people voted Trump for the economy and to lessen government waste? Is this not the exact opposite? Are you all done even pretending you care about this kind of stuff? A sign on my street fell down so I called the Department of Transportation and they fixed it. It generated $0 for the economy. They did it because it's the government's job. Arresting people who break the law is the government's job. There is no "wait for a peer reviewed study that confirms this creates more economic dollars than were invested into it." Arresting people is not an economic program. Arresting people can be an economic negative and you should still do it. If Elon Musk machinegunned Central Park, you should hang him. Regardless of how much it would crash the NASDAQ. Asinine concern trolling.
Your making up things I never said and avoiding my actual question. Which was simple and straight forward. But I guess on brand, so good for you?
|
On October 06 2025 05:31 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 04:06 KwarK wrote:On October 06 2025 03:55 Uldridge wrote:On October 06 2025 03:38 KwarK wrote:
I'm pretty sure "we have to kill their families" was part of Trump's official platform. Also there's a very clear pattern with conservatives where they only understand why a given thing is wrong when it happens to them, such as when they're victims of police brutality or when they have close family members who come out as gay. Obviously I'd prefer if they could learn some other way, it ought not to be necessary for them to need to see their own children killed before they understand the problem with Trump's platform of "we have to kill their families". It's not good. But given that it is the method of education that they themselves have chosen I don't really see any issue with them experiencing the world they created. I didn't want it. I voted against it. They wanted it. They voted for it. You seem to think that there is another way for them other than it happening to them before they can understand it, like it is a choice. This is false, the understanding before the experience is an alien language they'll never understand. That's like explaining the taste of an apple before letting someone taste it. “Beware the sin of empathy” I still can't get around the fact that that is not a line from Warhammer 40k.
The Imperium in WH40k was inspired by the Nazis and Christofascists like Gerald L. K. Smith (but with mostly late medieval Catholic aesthetics), so I don't know what's really surprising about modern Christofascists being indistinguishable from them.
On October 06 2025 05:37 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2025 05:31 Simberto wrote:On October 06 2025 04:06 KwarK wrote:On October 06 2025 03:55 Uldridge wrote:On October 06 2025 03:38 KwarK wrote:
I'm pretty sure "we have to kill their families" was part of Trump's official platform. Also there's a very clear pattern with conservatives where they only understand why a given thing is wrong when it happens to them, such as when they're victims of police brutality or when they have close family members who come out as gay. Obviously I'd prefer if they could learn some other way, it ought not to be necessary for them to need to see their own children killed before they understand the problem with Trump's platform of "we have to kill their families". It's not good. But given that it is the method of education that they themselves have chosen I don't really see any issue with them experiencing the world they created. I didn't want it. I voted against it. They wanted it. They voted for it. You seem to think that there is another way for them other than it happening to them before they can understand it, like it is a choice. This is false, the understanding before the experience is an alien language they'll never understand. That's like explaining the taste of an apple before letting someone taste it. “Beware the sin of empathy” I still can't get around the fact that that is not a line from Warhammer 40k. ‘Innocence proves nothing’ is on the other hand, and that feels depressingly fitting too
The Space Marine maxim "There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt" is a pretty direct reference to Augustine's writings on Original Sin. Augustine thought people who died as unbaptized babies were tortured for eternity in Hell, but a slightly less bad part of Hell than adult sinners.
|
On October 06 2025 04:31 KwarK wrote:
Oblade here promoting law and order in between simping for Trump. That’s a good one. It’d be terrible if someone broke the law and went unpunished. Can’t be having that. Oblade just believes all law must be enforced, in all circumstances, just how it is. That means that he doesn’t have to defend whether it makes sense to enforce in this instance, he’s just an absolutist on this one, all laws.
It doesn‘t work that way.
When it does, it‘s usually because the enforcers are free to break it.
As in, if you‘re in the club you can do anything you want. Just keep lying for us.
Maybe that‘s where oBlade is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
