And solely when a Republican is President. When a Dem is doing it, they’re quiet as church mice about it.
Look! Over there!
By the way, I don’t think I’ve ever before met anyone who, upon learning that helpless innocent children were being horrendously abused, was more outraged that it was his political opponents who were pointing it out than by the ongoing horrendous abuse of helpless innocent children.
“We could stop the horrendous abuse of these poor innocent children, but only if it benefited my political party” is not a sentence I could ever see myself saying.
Protip: I suspect that Jesus himself might also strongly disapprove of that stance, which might be important to those people who are interested in not burning in hell for all eternity.
Can you guess how little I value your suspicions about what Jesus might disapprove of?
Again, your side didn’t think it was “horrendous abuse” until it was President Trump in the White House. Prior to that, when it was Obama, it was just ho-hum business as usual. Now the left can’t get enough of their pearl-clutching. shrug
Unlike your fine self, who is vigorously arguing…[checks notes]…that we should ignore the ongoing horrendous abuse of helpless infants because a Republican is doing it? What an odd position to take as the moral high ground.
I’m mostly arguing that you should be less hyperbolic about the situation if you want to be seen as credible.
No need to rely on my suspicions–there’s a whole book listing the things he disapproved of. You could read it.
Yes, those awful left, upset that innocent infants are being horrendously abused. Luckily you’re here now, so the abuse will [checks notes]…continue unchecked while you argue in support of the abusers? That can’t be right?
Yes, the real problem here isn’t the actual ongoing horrendous abuse of innocent children and infants, it’s that we’re talking about it.
My use of terminology is correct and you picking at it is just another snarky diversion.
I answered your question. Go back and re-read my post for comprehension this time.
Of course he doesn’t. I asked previously: “could we please not treat this as an idea worth taking seriously?” I’d appreciate it if we did collectively did that. I’m trying to keep a certain seriousness of tone here.
Ditka, I’d really appreciate it if you stopped posting in this thread. Your opinion (“It’s all FAKE NEWS!!1 Also ha ha brown kids are suffering!”) is noted, thank you. It’s also sick, disgusting, and hateful, and I’m astonished that it’s considered okay on this forum. If you really want to say things like that, I welcome you to find another thread, and please give this one a pass. I encourage everyone else to not feed this line of argumentation. It is not worth taking seriously.
Argued for that in open court - HurricaneDitka are you saying the Administration’s own lawyer’s aren’t credible? Or do consider a LACK of soap and toothpaste to be part of “safe and sanitary”?
Stay in denial, HurricaneDitka, so later on down the lie you can claim you “didn’t know” and no one told you (though, really, we did) when the true extent of this Administration’s crimes are revealed. After all, it’s so much more comfortable to live in denial and ignorance than face the ugliness of reality.
:rolleyes:
Yes, we know anyone who disagrees with your viewpoint is “partisan” and “not credible”. It’s a pattern with you, not just in thread on this topic but about really anything.
…and now it becomes all the fault of the Democrats. Nothing bad is ever, ever the fault of the Republicans, they never do anything wrong, Trump is the bestest president ever. :rolleyes:
I prefer they stop separating families. Full stop.
Before I start this list I’m just going to say we manage to provide all of the following to people convicted of felonies. The conditions these people - who have been convicted of no crime - are held in are worse than prison:
I prefer they provide something soft to sleep on.
I prefer they turn the lights off at night so people can sleep better.
I prefer that soap, toothpaste, toothbrushes, showers, and towels be provided.
I prefer that clean changes of clothing be provided.
I prefer that three meals a day are provided.
That’s assuming we need to lock people up at all - which I’m not entirely convinced is necessary. But those we do decide to lock up - and how the hell it was determined that small children needed to be lock up I can’t fathom - should be kept in humane conditions. Which includes modern sanitary products like soap and toothpaste.
Nope. Not going to. Because they are concentration camps.
Are you butt-hurt that your side in this discussion is in the wrong? I don’t find the term “inflammatory”, I find it accurate. The discussion of proper terminology is a distraction from the real issues here, which are people being held in inhumane conditions and the destruction of families.
If the Right is so damn superior then it can STOP the abuse and neglect and show those goddamned Lefties how it’s done, right?
But the Right never fixes anything, they just blame someone else for everything. Because they’re helpless and oppressed rather than neglectful and a bunch of jerks. Everyone on the Right is “doing a fine job” right up until they day they resign or are fired and then they were horrible incompetents all along, and if they’re women ugly, too.
Just FYI, it’s completely false to say that the “toothbrush” issue was about an Obama policy. The lawsuit that ended up with an agreement requiring “safe and sanitary” conditions for holding children dates back to the 80s, and the conditions have been challenged in court multiple times including in the Obama administration, but no one has suggested that the Obama administration didn’t provide toothbrushes and basic hygiene supplies, and only a Trump administration lawyer has argued that they aren’t necessary for “safe and sanitary” conditions. Further, the Trump administration is on record that they are in favor of harming migrant children for deterrent purposes.
Also, as I’ve repeatedly pointed out throughout the thread, the argument makes just no fucking sense. It’s not the democrats who are saying, “These are concentration camps.” Pelosi basically told AOC to shut up, and most dems have been completely silent on the issue. This is coming entirely from historians, human rights activists, and journalists, while most of the democratic party has been shamefully silent on the issue. Notable exceptions: AOC, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and Elizabeth Warren.
We’re rehashing bad, off-topic arguments here, and I’d appreciate it if we stayed focused on the topic of the thread.
Speaking of which: Utah’s largest newspaper, the Salt Lake Tribune, recently came out in defense of AOC.
The Salt Lake Tribune’s editorial board on Saturday came to the defense of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), arguing it’s correct to call the Trump administration’s migrant detention facilities “concentration camps.”
“They are not work camps. They are not death camps. At least, not on purpose,” the board wrote. “Our government is not building massive gas chambers and industrial crematoria. It is not conducting sick medical experiments on members of an unfavored class.”
“But that does not mean that the places into which we are herding tens of thousands of migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers are not properly called concentration camps. Because that is precisely what they are,” the board added.
Utah is pretty red. This is making traction even there.
The Trump administration is on record as in favor of harming migrant children for deterrent purposes. Either Trump supporters are unaware of this, or they don’t really care.
You can disagree that the earth is round, but that doesn’t suddenly make it flat. There is a deliberate policy of not providing basic hygiene supplies like soap and toothpaste ACCORDING TO THE LAWYERS DEFENDING THE CONCENTRATION CAMPS. That is not caused by funding, or poor planning. That is deliberately evil planning. And it’s not being done by ‘both sides’. Your ‘disagreement’ is simply you putting your fingers in your ears and pretending that reality isn’t happening.
It’s mot that they don’t care, it’s that they support the policy. To understand their positions, you have to view the world through a white nationalist lens: their goal is to cleanse America of its racial contamination. If some children have to die in the process, they are ok with that price.
Although I blame Trump for inciting racially-charged nativist animus, the progressives aren’t entirely blameless either. The question in the thread title is what effect will Trump’s camps have on his reelection and I think that’s pretty much it in a nutshell:
Trump wants to polarize people so that Democrats will fight each other over who’s a real humanitarian and who’s coward, who’s a real progressive and who’s not.
Memo to the Dems: Trump wants you outraged so that you will be angry at people who aren’t ‘outraged enough.’