Why do left wingers hide behind skin color or sexual orientation to excuse their buffoonery?

[WestCanMan]

16 hours ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

 

Since I.C.E. insists on terrorizing neighborhoods, those neighborhoods are going to fight back.

And, since I.C.E. refuses to respect the sanctimony of citizens homes, yall shouldn't expect protestors to respect the sanctity of any buildings I.C.E. frequents. 

Tit for tat.

I can see you're still confused. 

May i suggest continuing your education at your local Community College, or a University Extension program. Most offer courses in Ethics, Philosophy, Social Justice, and Diversity & Inclusion.

You know..... fill in the areas where you're lacking.

Your welcome. 

FYI no neighbourhoods are being "terrorized". 

Can you describe for me where you see "terror"?

Do you understand that a central theme of this whole alleged "terror" issue is that:

• in sanctuary cities, illegals with dangerous criminal histories are let out of city jails without informing ICE
• that's not just "comforting for those criminals and their families", it's an international advertisement that illegally entering the US to live there is A-OK
• then, instead of ICE just showing up in between coffee breaks to take someone out of a jail cell, while they are alone and unarmed, ICE has to track them down in the community, which means that 
• sometimes they show up at kids' schools
• sometimes they have to arrest them in their homes, where they may be armed and there may be innocent women and children present, and that means "scary raid"
• so, the "terror" that you are talking about is often a symptom of the bad Dem policy of releasing criminals back into the community, which is a common theme.

I know that your job as a left4rd is to ignore unwanted information, and I can predict with 100% accuracy what your reply will look like:

• you'll ignore the points for which you have no defense
• you will throw down some kind of strawman argument, and pretend to be a pure heart for caring about it
• you will play the angry SJW card and yell about some imaginary condition
• you make some unsubstantiated allegations and throw down some sandbox insults
• you will pretend that ICE agents pose more of a threat to the community at large than rapists, pedophiles, drug dealers and murderers, 

Did I miss anything, CrakHo? Do you have another trick up your sleeve today, or are you gonna go with the same old "tired and untrue" debate tactics?

[WestCanMan]

I know that this is gonna sound "conspiratorial", but I honesty think that 90% of this Fox vs CNN/GOP vs Dems story about illegals is really just about slavery.

Slaves:

1. do shitty jobs
2. work long hours
3. just to end up with almost no material return for their toil
4. they live in the shittiest homes
5. in the worst neighbourhoods
6. without the full rights of citizens - poor medical care, can't vote, can't get good jobs, etc

Illegals:

1. same as above
2. same as above
3. same as above
4. same as above
5. same as above
6. same as above - illegals get poor access to medical care, can't vote, can't get good jobs because they have no SIN numbers...

So the Dems and GOP are essentially partners in this dance where they:

• turn up/down the border heat
• turn up/down the heat on illegals in the country, depending on how many "slaves" they need. 

the one perk is that instead of shackles, illegals have the carrot dangled in front of them of 1) having their children in American schools, 2) the possibility that their children will one day become full citizens with full rights.

Right now, the heat is being turned up, to stem the flow and maybe get rid of some of the less attractive slaves, sorry, illegals. The alleged "terror" aspect of this is just more BS that's designed to keep us all in our lanes, bickering at each other.

Let's all just agree that this is all a sham, meant to distract us from the fact that slavery never really ended.  

 

I don't "blame America". Economics is war, and countries that the US competes with in other continents all have their own versions of slavery, and the US needs theirs or their economy will crash due to the wage gap between "American workers" and "everyone else's actual slave class". 

You and I are 1 or 2 levels up from basic slaves, and the Dems/GOP are keeping us all divided by using these ridiculous debates, like abortion, gun control, the border....

There is no great reason for animosity amongst us peons, just over the abortion debate, for example. Almost everyone agrees that women should have access to abortion for roughly 3 months, and there's no reason for us all to defend the outliers on our "side". People who think that a 13-yr-old who was raped should be forced to have her baby if she didnt get an abortion soon enough can go to hell. People that think a healthy 8-month-old fetus can just be killed can go to hell.

These are all relatively easy issues to solve. But they're not supposed to be resolved. They are supposed to be used to control us. We are supposed to be angry at each other, and support our tribes against each other, because as long as we are all in 2 tribes, there's no room for a third tribe.  

[Hodad]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

I know that this is gonna sound "conspiratorial", but I honesty think that 90% of this Fox vs CNN/GOP vs Dems story about illegals is really just about slavery.

Slaves:

1. do shitty jobs
2. work long hours
3. just to end up with almost no material return for their toil
4. they live in the shittiest homes
5. in the worst neighbourhoods
6. without the full rights of citizens - poor medical care, can't vote, can't get good jobs, etc

Illegals:

1. same as above
2. same as above
3. same as above
4. same as above
5. same as above
6. same as above - illegals get poor access to medical care, can't vote, can't get good jobs because they have no SIN numbers...

So the Dems and GOP are essentially partners in this dance where they:

• turn up/down the border heat
• turn up/down the heat on illegals in the country, depending on how many "slaves" they need. 

the one perk is that instead of shackles, illegals have the carrot dangled in front of them of 1) having their children in American schools, 2) the possibility that their children will one day become full citizens with full rights.

Right now, the heat is being turned up, to stem the flow and maybe get rid of some of the less attractive slaves, sorry, illegals. The alleged "terror" aspect of this is just more BS that's designed to keep us all in our lanes, bickering at each other.

Let's all just agree that this is all a sham, meant to distract us from the fact that slavery never really ended.  

 

I don't "blame America". Economics is war, and countries that the US competes with in other continents all have their own versions of slavery, and the US needs theirs or their economy will crash due to the wage gap between "American workers" and "everyone else's actual slave class". 

You and I are 1 or 2 levels up from basic slaves, and the Dems/GOP are keeping us all divided by using these ridiculous debates, like abortion, gun control, the border....

 

Slaves aren't free to choose. That's the real difference--and it makes all the difference. They are not free to improve themselves or their circumstances. they are owned. They are property. They can be abused without option or recourse. The picture you're trying to paint here massively undersells the horrors of slavery and massively oversells the plight of the undocumented, who come electively because every aspect of their lives are better here than in the places they flee. They choose.

And, for the record, it's the democratic states where immigrants are given the most opportunity to thrive within legal channels and where they have the most rights and protections. As always, it's a fact that the population exists. States and cities simply have to manage that population in the way that's best for the entire population. 

 

[User]

15 minutes ago, Hodad said:

States and cities simply have to manage that population in the way that's best for the entire population. 

And your notion of what is best or how to achieve that is where the problem is. 

[CrakHoBarbie]

3 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Did you read past the headlines? Do you care? I feel like you just want to be mad and don't care what the truth is. 

Truth: judicial warrants are not required. Administrative warrants are required. Administrative warrants are issued based on a final order of removal that is signed by a judge. 

Under the Fourth Amendment, a judicial warrant signed by a judge or magistrate is required for law enforcement to enter a dwelling, as established in
Payton v. New York.

While administrative warrants are used for immigration arrests, they do not authorize forced entry into a home without consent.

 

"The red hats dont know much about anything,  and the love reminding us of it"

--------- CrakHoBarbie

4 hours ago, Legato said:

Please don't accuse others of what you are constantly in the process of doing.

I can support all my claims through citation.

You support yours with your "feelings".

[Legato]

3 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

I can support all my claims through citation.

You support yours with your "feelings".

Bullcrap

[CrakHoBarbie]

7 hours ago, Venandi said:

There's some wisdom in that I think, it's exactly how you got to where you are today and now you don't like it.

The worst part of all this was the predictability, the fact that you were repeatedly warned about the destination, warned that a backlash was inevitable and warned that when it occurred.... you wouldn't like it.

 POOF, here we are.

IMO, the same thing is coming to some European countries in the near future, not quite there yet but it's coming. So, when I ask "what did you think was going to happen" it isn't rhetorical and it's not the result of being opposed to immigration.... it's purely about being opposed to bat shi% craziness. 

Speaking personally now, why do you suppose that I (and any number of ex liberal voters) were fundamentally opposed to bat shi$ crazy immigration abuses in the US?

It's because your actions were predictable;

It's because we could see where those actions would take us and we didn't want to travel to Crazy Island with you;

It's because the end result (in terms of growing opposition and animosity) was predictable;

It's because the backlash that animosity created was predictable; and especially

It's because that backlash (not if but when it came) would hurt a lot of people.

 

But take heart.. that confusion can only linger in the continued presence of bat shi% craziness. Extremes always result in equal and opposite extremes and the law of the see-saw always raises the (bat shi%) bar incrementally in equal and opposite measure.

Put on a blue hat and go see the word, circumstances are always different but the principle remains. On a smaller scale, watch the escalation dynamic in the parking lot after closing time. Watch how it turns into something affectionately labeled "the monkey dance." 

Maybe it's part of the human condition... I don't know the answer but It always comes with consequences and it always begs the same question.

WTF did you think was going to happen? 

The better question, the one you should have asked yourself at the get go is "do you really want what you seem to be asking for?"

 

I agree in as much as we elected a far right, megalomaniac to the most powerful seat on the planet, what did we think would happen?

Well, its happening. 

But, I didnt want him elected.

Nor did the tens of thousands protesting his policies and tactics now.

I, like many, agree with the deportation of those whom are here illegally. 

What i take issue with is the unconstitutional methods being forced on our citizenry in the name of deportations.

My question for you is, when they willfully break and ignore constitutional law,  what did you think was going to happen?

Capitulation?

Guess again.

3 minutes ago, Legato said:

Bullcrap

Ahh, very compelling retort.

Normally,  one must visit a prison to find one of your stature. 

 

[Legato]

2 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

I agree in as much as we elected a far right, megalomaniac to the most powerful seat on the planet, what did we think would happen?

Well, its happening. 

But, I didnt want him elected.

Nor did the tens of thousands protesting his policies and tactics now.

I, like many, agree with the deportation of those whom are here illegally. 

What i take issue with is the unconstitutional methods being forced on our citizenry in the name of deportations.

My question for you is, when they willfully break and ignore constitutional law,  what did you think was going to happen?

Capitulation?

Guess again.

Ahh, very compelling retort.

Normally,  one must visit a prison to find one of your stature. 

 

How long have you been out?

[CrakHoBarbie]

1 minute ago, Legato said:

How long have you been out?

Good line.

[gatomontes99]

29 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Under the Fourth Amendment, a judicial warrant signed by a judge or magistrate is required for law enforcement to enter a dwelling, as established in
Payton v. New York.

Not a bad argument. But  it is wrong. 

The Administrative Warrant that ICE is using is supported by a Judicially signed Final Deportation Order. The memo says specifically that only the known residence of the illegal alien that the Final Deportation Order was issued for is an acceptable domicile for entry. It also prohibits forced entry without proper notification and sets limits on when they can do it. A LWNJ will, of course, strike this down. But the SCOTUS will uphold this. 

[CrakHoBarbie]

14 hours ago, User said:

An honest comment. 

ICE would not even be noticed if it were not for the leftist agitators causing an issue and making it a big scene. 

If I.C.E. followed Constitutional law, there'd be nothing to complain about.

Obama deported approximately 2.5 million people. More than any other president. And, he did it without prompting protests.

As I said before, I agree with deporting illegals.  But I insist that its done to the letter of the law.

14 hours ago, User said:

No, they do not. They only prove you can't read, as ICE has administrative warrants and orders of removal from an Immigration Judge. 

You are ignorantly or dishonestly posting the headlines. 

 

You need to brush up on your civics.

4th Amendment protections require federal agents to obtain a warrant signed by a judge or magistrate to enter a private dwelling,

While a 2025 memo suggests ICE can legslly use administrative warrants to enter homes, this notion contradicts traditional, long-standing constitutional protections. 

Thus , ICE is breaking Constitutional law daily, terrorizing neighborshoods.

Just because you "agree" with it, doesn't make it legal.

[CrakHoBarbie]

4 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Not a bad argument. But  it is wrong. 

The Administrative Warrant that ICE is using is supported by a Judicially signed Final Deportation Order. The memo says specifically that only the known residence of the illegal alien that the Final Deportation Order was issued for is an acceptable domicile for entry. It also prohibits forced entry without proper notification and sets limits on when they can do it. A LWNJ will, of course, strike this down. But the SCOTUS will uphold this. 

Yet, in application, ICE has been racial profiling,  kicking in doors without a judicial warrant, killing  people, shooting people, maiming people, teargassing peaceful protesters. Tackling arresting citizens and folks here legally. If you cannot prove you're a citizen, they will take you and hold you without just cause, sometimes for days without a charge.

You agree with this cruel, unconstitutional activity because you agree with it.

Thats just the type of person you are.

Youre fine with breaking the law if it suits your needs.

Im not.

[User]

15 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

If I.C.E. followed Constitutional law, there'd be nothing to complain about.

Obama deported approximately 2.5 million people. More than any other president. And, he did it without prompting protests.

As I said before, I agree with deporting illegals.  But I insist that its done to the letter of the law.

LOL, you are so full of shit. 

18 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Thus , ICE is breaking Constitutional law daily, terrorizing neighborshoods.

Just because you "agree" with it, doesn't make it legal.

You have a memo, you do not have examples of ICE breaking Constitutional law daily or that this is terrorizing neighborhoods. 

 

[User]

12 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Yet, in application, ICE has been racial profiling,  kicking in doors without a judicial warrant, killing  people, shooting people, maiming people, teargassing peaceful protesters. Tackling arresting citizens and folks here legally. If you cannot prove you're a citizen, they will take you and hold you without just cause, sometimes for days without a charge.

You agree with this cruel, unconstitutional activity because you agree with it.

Thats just the type of person you are.

Youre fine with breaking the law if it suits your needs.

Im not.

ICE is not racial profiling anymore than if you knew a black man just killed someone as witnesses allege and are now engaged in targetted investigations around that area looking for a black man. 

ICE is killing people in self defense. 

People have no right to obstruct ICE, you say you support them, but then cheer on people obstructing them. 

 

[CrakHoBarbie]

Just now, User said:

LOL, you are so full of shit. 

You have a memo, you do not have examples of ICE breaking Constitutional law daily or that this is terrorizing neighborhoods. 

 

I've made my contentions clear.

I've supported my contentions with multiple citations.

So, wallow in the abyss of ignorance you've dug for yourself. Re-read my past posts and argue with yourself.

You are dismissed. 

[User]

3 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

I've made my contentions clear.

I've supported my contentions with multiple citations.

So, wallow in the abyss of ignorance you've dug for yourself. Re-read my past posts and argue with yourself.

You are dismissed. 

The last few days all you have done is lie about ICE, lie about numerous other things, and cheer on the lawlessness of people opposing them and disrupting a church. 

You. Are. Full. Of. Shit. 

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

Slaves aren't free to choose. That's the real difference--and it makes all the difference. They are not free to improve themselves or their circumstances. they are owned. They are property. They can be abused without option or recourse.

Call it "slavery light" if you want, but it's 100% certain that there were slaves in the past who had nicer lives than the avg illegal immigrant does, and there are illegal immigrants in the US who lead far worse lives than 90% of slaves ever did. 

There are sex-slaves in the US, Hodad. Does it get any worse than that? Not legally, mind you, but this massive front of 10M+ illegals living in secrecy provides a huge curtain, and allows rampant gang crime activity to flourish.

There are people who work in slaughterhouses for 60+ hrs a week for meagre pay. Was slavery so much worse than that? At the end of the day, they all just did shit jobs just to go back to eat low-cost foods in their shitty houses.

And don't forget, Hodad: people of your race and religion owned slaves at one point in history too, and they all thought it was normal. And not just for a minute, probably centuries. Not just a few slaves either, millions. Some of your ancestors' slaves were badly mistreated, some were treated well, and I know that because human nature just is what it is. You can't raise everyone in Iran to love pedophilia & beheading people just because of their religion, and you can't make everyone in Tibet move earth worms out of the way when they want to dig a hole. 

Quote

The picture you're trying to paint here massively undersells the horrors of slavery and massively oversells the plight of the undocumented, who come electively because every aspect of their lives are better here than in the places they flee. They choose.

The picture you're trying to paint is one of minimization and exaggeration. 

If you think that every slave was whipped every day you're wrong. If you think that illegals don't experience violence and fear on a regular basis you are wrong again. And part of the reason the feel so much fear is that the Dems allow groups like the cartels, MS13 and Tren De Aragua prey on them. They don't arrest people like that, they let people out of jail without avoiding ICE, and they let them out on low bail. Illegal immigrants experience a lot of fear and loss, simply because Dem politicians don't give a F. 

Quote

And, for the record, it's the democratic states where immigrants are given the most opportunity to thrive within legal channels and where they have the most rights and protections. As always, it's a fact that the population exists. States and cities simply have to manage that population in the way that's best for the entire population. 

Gimme a break. What state has more illegals than Texas? 

And what happens to illegals that get shipped out of Texas to Dem-run states? 

You're sitting here playing the division game while your handlers in the DNC make bank off of the illegals that work in their slaughterhouses, sleep in their slums, and eat the garbage at MacDonald's and a bunch of refined/processed food. 

Illegals are profitable for Hillary et al. They're not here because "Hiwawy wants to pwotect them" you raging dipshit. 

[gatomontes99]

37 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Yet, in application, ICE has been racial profiling,  kicking in doors without a judicial warrant, killing  people, shooting people, maiming people, teargassing peaceful protesters.

No they have not done any of those things. Ask yourself why this has not happened in Texas, Florida, Oklahoma or any other red state. Because the people in those states are not rioting. The people in those states do not interfere with their operations. The governments in those states cooperate and arrests are made in jails. 

What you describe is a reaction to radicals rioting and attempting to bypass democratically instituted laws. What you describe is what must be done to protect the true and just laws of our Republic in the face of authoritarianism. 

Edited January 23 by gatomontes99

[eyeball]

On 1/22/2026 at 7:20 AM, User said:

Not because he is a “gay black man”

No, it's because of the type of people who single him out.

[WestCanMan]

20 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

wallow in the abyss of ignorance you've dug for yourself

Geez, wherever did you get that idea from...?

[User]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

No, it's because of the type of people who single him out.

Those interested in law and order?

The question is, why wouldn't you also single him out?

 

[Venandi]

1 hour ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

My question for you is, when they willfully break and ignore constitutional law,  what did you think was going to happen?

I suppose we could argue constitutional and immigration law and the duty of any serving President (of any stripe) to enforce it as a matter of federal law and jurisdiction... but it would likely be a long, and ultimately unproductive exchange.

The short answer to your question, and putting aside my disagreement with the way you framed it is... yes.

I did think it would happen, in fact I thought it was an inevitable dive into the same sort of madness that the previous madness precipitated. A sad comment on human nature perhaps but it's the way of the world.

Taken a step further, I think it will soon happen in some European countries too. 

IMO, the whole thing is unfortunate but predictable. My concern from the start was the inevitable backlash, I think it could easily have been avoided and the missing ingredient is compassion... you must have considered the backlash a possibility or even a likelihood; or did you?

At the risk of repeating myself, I do think the same thing will happen in the European theatre at some point and that it will happen for the same reason... it's simply my own view of consequences, immigration done poorly, and cynical view of human nature in general.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 23 by Venandi

[CrakHoBarbie]

10 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

No they have not done any of those things. Ask yourself why this has not happened in Texas, Florida, Oklahoma or any other red state. 

 

Simple.

The redhats in those states "agree" with I.C.E.'s unconstitutional actions.

So, they just step out of the way and allow the unconstitutional activities to happen. 

We in blue states dont abide by that shit.

Obama deported 2.5 million illegal immigrants. More than any other president. 

But, he followed Constitutional law.

Thus, there were no protests.

How about you just accept responsibility for this clusterf__k you helped enable?

 

[eyeball]

12 minutes ago, User said:

Those interested in law and order?

While being arseholes about it.

16 minutes ago, User said:

The question is, why wouldn't you also single him out?

I'm not an arsehole.

[User]

2 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Obama deported 2.5 million illegal immigrants. More than any other president. 

These were not interior deportations. You guys dishonestly throw this statistic around. Obama treated every turn away at the border as a "deportation." 

 

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

While being arseholes about it.

So... let's get this right, people who think other people should not trespass into a Church, refuse to leave, and disrupt their services are the a$sholes?

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

I'm not an arsehole.

Yes, you are. You support this lawlessness.