Hilary singing Trump's song on migration

[eyeball]

6 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

The entire exercise was based on money...including a lottery.

https://www.thoughtco.com/who-paid-for-the-statue-of-liberty-1773828

Really. Including the thought behind the gift from France as well as the poetically affirmative prose attached to that gift, it was all entirely based on money?

It had bugger all to do with liberty.  Who knew? 

Edited November 25, 2018 by eyeball

[bush_cheney2004]

5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Really. Including the thought behind the gift from France as well as the poetically affirmative prose attached to that gift was all entirely based on money?

It had bugger all to do with liberty.  Who knew? 

 

Indeed...it was more about importing cheap immigrant labour....except for Chinese and Africans !   New Yorkers didn't even want the statue at first.

Romantic revisionists of history like to claim otherwise...especially today.

Edited November 25, 2018 by bush_cheney2004

[eyeball]

10 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Romantic revisionists of history like to claim otherwise...especially today.

[Zeitgeist]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Or simply convince people they're suffering economically due to globalization and then point at someone else to blame - like immigrants who actually are suffering the economic fallout of globalization.

Many aspects of globalization have been highly beneficial.  It has provided cheap goods in developed countries and helped developing economies advance the standard of living of citizens, creating new markets into which developed countries can sell goods.  It's mostly a win-win.  Globalization as public menace is a canard.  However, globalization without global rules creates an uneven playing field and leads to the kinds of backlashes underway now in right-leaning and quasi-fascist countries.  As long as leadership in the leading economies continue to stoke fear, we will remain at a standstill, unable to set up the labour, environmental, and trade rules that would smooth the edges because of suspicion towards "global elites" and international organizations.  The UN and WTO have been cast as the source of the problems with globalization instead of the solution, and undermined as a result.  The backlash against all things global makes it difficult to fix the problems with trade and globalization.  

[taxme]

On 11/23/2018 at 1:47 PM, turningrite said:

Well, progressives must be apoplectic. According to a piece published on the NP site, Hillary Clinton now appears to agree with the proposition that migration and immigration are fueling nationalism and populism. Will she be working for Trump in the near future? For all the fuss made by progressives about Trump's views on immigration and illegal migrants, there might be something valid in Trump's position after all. If Hillary now gets it, however belatedly, can ordinary people (i.e. "deplorables") be criticized for reaching similar conclusions? I find the observation of the Italian politician Giorgia Meloni particularly relevant where she notes that Clinton appeared to acknowledge that opposition to migration was “not a problem of racism,” and that “if you don’t control migration it will affect mostly poor people, people living on the outskirts, working classes." Why has it taken otherwise intelligent people so long to figure this out?

https://nationalpost.com/news/world/hillary-clinton-says-if-europe-wants-to-curb-right-wing-populism-it-must-get-a-handle-on-migration

Apparently, Hillary is not saying very much about migration and immigration into America. Why? Is she trying to make it appear as though she is now against migration and immigration into America now as a ploy to maybe try to get some right wing votes? Hillary is a liberal democrat and her words should never be listened too or believed because, as Trump has said many times, Hillary is a liar and a crook. Hillary and her many pro immigration groups and big crooked business people want more illegals to enter America because it is good for them and votes. She wants all those asylum seekers at the Mexican/American border to flood America. But Trump has said that is not going to happen. Trump says that if they want to apply for asylum then do it legally. Hillary is not that intelligent but she is quite devious and at times can be quite the biotch. 

[GostHacked]

18 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

The causes of many mass migrations are political, mostly related to climate change.  That was the case in Syria.  That civil war had its roots in a drought. 

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/WCAS-D-13-00059.1

 

You sure it was not foreign powers fucking with Syria?

[Zeitgeist]

1 hour ago, GostHacked said:

You sure it was not foreign powers fucking with Syria?

It was both, but the root causes of the unrest were economic.  Once the unrest started, foreign powers became involved, Russia supporting government forces, the US supporting the rebels.  ISIS took advantage of the crisis and made territorial gains.  The result was a massive refugee exodus that the US refused to help.  So yes, later on it became much more than an economic crisis.  

[Shady]

3 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

It was both, but the root causes of the unrest were economic.  Once the unrest started, foreign powers became involved, Russia supporting government forces, the US supporting the rebels.  ISIS took advantage of the crisis and made territorial gains.  The result was a massive refugee exodus that the US refused to help.  So yes, later on it became much more than an economic crisis.  

The point is, it had nothing to do with climate change.  Nothing.

[Zeitgeist]

18 minutes ago, Truth Detector said:

The point is, it had nothing to do with climate change.  Nothing.

You’re absolutely wrong. The drought started the unrest. 

[turningrite]

3 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

It was both, but the root causes of the unrest were economic.  Once the unrest started, foreign powers became involved, Russia supporting government forces, the US supporting the rebels.  ISIS took advantage of the crisis and made territorial gains.  The result was a massive refugee exodus that the US refused to help.  So yes, later on it became much more than an economic crisis.  

I believe the root causes are/were primarily domestic and economic. Factional unrest became particularly problematic during the Arab Spring - which, as we should recall, was largely cheered on by many naive Westerners. Outside powers became involved, directly and indirectly, after the factional fighting broke into the open following the Arab Spring. However, the role of these powers in exacerbating factional tensions cannot be underestimated. The overthrow of Saddam in Iraq and the disbanding of his army fed into the creation of ISIS/ISIL, in particular. I tend to agree with those who hold that the civil war was and is not substantially grounded in the consequences of climate change. Instead, a self-serving autocratic regime, which had been in place for decades, became increasingly vulnerable due to long-term economic mismanagement and stagnation. Regimes that are considered by the populations they govern to be legitimate can withstand the problems and tensions that arise out of droughts and other catastrophes. 

Edited November 26, 2018 by turningrite

[GostHacked]

3 hours ago, turningrite said:

I believe the root causes are/were primarily domestic and economic. Factional unrest became particularly problematic during the Arab Spring - which, as we should recall, was largely cheered on by many naive Westerners. Outside powers became involved, directly and indirectly, after the factional fighting broke into the open following the Arab Spring. However, the role of these powers in exacerbating factional tensions cannot be underestimated. The overthrow of Saddam in Iraq and the disbanding of his army fed into the creation of ISIS/ISIL, in particular. I tend to agree with those who hold that the civil war was and is not substantially grounded in the consequences of climate change. Instead, a self-serving autocratic regime, which had been in place for decades, became increasingly vulnerable due to long-term economic mismanagement and stagnation. Regimes that are considered by the populations they govern to be legitimate can withstand the problems and tensions that arise out of droughts and other catastrophes. 

Those points need to be driven home again and again. Hence why I never considered it a 'civil war' to begin with.

[TTM]

On 11/25/2018 at 1:00 PM, eyeball said:

Yeah well the left has had its populist movements too. I don't think I want to be around when the pendulum swings that way again any more than you.

FDR?  Not quite as scary as Trump...

[eyeball]

16 hours ago, TTM said:

FDR?  Not quite as scary as Trump...

How about Stalin or Pol Pot?

[eyeball]

On 11/26/2018 at 11:22 AM, Zeitgeist said:

You’re absolutely wrong. The drought started the unrest. 

It clearly started due to the geopolitical vandalism that super-powers inflicted in the region.  Climate change effects came after that but I do think climate change will make it just about impossible for the region to recover.

[TTM]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

How about Stalin or Pol Pot?

Not American

[WestCanMan]

On 11/24/2018 at 1:28 PM, Zeitgeist said:

I still don’t understand why managing the border is a challenge today, given satellite and drone technology, as well as infrared cameras.  Simply have a system of drones over borders, co-managed by both countries.  If someone crosses a border illegally, track them and deploy law enforcement.  I think even Trump knows that walls are a medieval solution: “Okay maybe a ladder” can surmount the wall.  As for existing illlegals, deport in a humane way and make it easier to immigrate for Dreamers who’ve been in the country more than a couple of years through no fault of their own than it is for their parents. These shouldn’t be such polarizing issues, if we tone down the rhetoric, proceed humanely, and stop separating children from their parents.  

As for Britain, yes Brexit will be messy, but it looks like they’ll reestablish their independence, for better or worse.  Being an island has always made managing the border easier than for mainland Europe.  I still think we’re better off with free movement of residency and labor within free trade blocks, but security of the block must be carefully managed and the federal government of such a block should have very limited power and spending ability.  National identities and values must be protected. Loose federations with good security.  

The thing with walls is that once they're up, they do most of the work themselves.

It would be exponentially more expensive to continually police every inch of that border 24/7/365 with thousands of humans, dogs, drones, etc, for the length of time that a wall would be up. And you could never stop the large caravans without walls. Tens of thousands of people all rushing the border 24/7 for a few weeks straight.... You'd need a large army to keep that under control.

Another thing about stopping groups like that with just raw manpower is that it would also require huge detainment centers, plus staffing for said buildings, food and clothing for people being held there, and huge teams of immigration officials to deal with such a rush of people.

It's like putting the toothpaste back in the tube, because once you release them they're just going to turn around and rush the border again.

[WestCanMan]

Hillary is an idiot. When you're a leader you're supposed to see problems in advance, not just notice them afterwards. The only thing that got her this far is her sickening lust for power and her pathological lying. 

People complain about Trump's comments about crowd size and the weather at his inauguration, those aren't even material facts and they're not lies either. The Benghazi lies were epic and the whole affair showed her complete lack of competence and awareness. She would have been in way over her head if she was elected.

[bush_cheney2004]

Some people forget that Obama defeated Clinton for the Democratic nomination in 2008 by hammering the Clinton machine...a rift that still exists today. 

 

Quote

...Mr. Obama and his team were confident that Mrs. Clinton would win and, like much of the country, were shocked when she did not. “I couldn’t shake the feeling that I should have seen it coming,” Mr. Rhodes writes. “Because when you distilled it, stripped out the racism and misogyny, we’d run against Hillary eight years ago with the same message Trump had used: She’s part of a corrupt establishment that can’t be trusted to bring change.”

 

How Trump’s Election Shook Obama: ‘What if We Were Wrong?’

[TTM]

5 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Some people forget that Obama defeated Clinton for the Democratic nomination in 2008 by hammering the Clinton machine...a rift that still exists today. 

 

 

How Trump’s Election Shook Obama: ‘What if We Were Wrong?’

Corporate money makes Democrats oblivious, and largely unelectable.  Republican voters apparently don't mind as much when their politicians are bought, so it's less of a problem for them. 

[eyeball]

On 11/30/2018 at 1:23 PM, WestCanMan said:

When you're a leader you're supposed to see problems in advance, not just notice them afterwards. 

Where were you when real lefties were warning how globalisation and climate change would cause mass migration today? Still in kindergarten I suspect.

[WestCanMan]

On 12/2/2018 at 1:33 PM, eyeball said:

Where were you when real lefties were warning how globalisation and climate change would cause mass migration today? Still in kindergarten I suspect.

Chicken little's climate theories are causing mass stupidity, or at least gathering the birds of a duller feather.

Globalization isn't causing mass migration either. War in Syria and other shithole countries is causing a forced exodus from Arica and the middle east. 

In the western hemisphere mass migration is a combination of 3 things: the dumpster fire known as socialism in Venezuela, Trump boasting about the strong American economy, and the Democrats' encouragement of illegal immigration and a whole plethora of other idiotic policies. 

[Zeitgeist]

Economic prosperity become uneven in Syria due to climate change driven drought, which heightened the political differences in that country, especially between the haves and have nots.  Ideological and religious political groups supported sides or took advantage of the turmoil to push their particular agendas.  So climate change does have much to do with this mass migration, likely the first of many to come.

[bush_cheney2004]

Syria was a mess long before any impact from "climate change".

[Zeitgeist]

Okay, decide for yourself.

 

[WestCanMan]

3 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Economic prosperity become uneven in Syria due to climate change driven drought, which heightened the political differences in that country, especially between the haves and have nots.  Ideological and religious political groups supported sides or took advantage of the turmoil to push their particular agendas.  So climate change does have much to do with this mass migration, likely the first of many to come.

Climate change isn’t the real issue. Shortage of clean water is a bigger issue, and it’s mainly due to overpopulation. 

When water sources are tapped to the max it takes very little to tip the scales.