Every Prospective Democrat Candidate For 2020 Now Calls For ICE To Be Abolished

[WildCat]

Bunch of neo-confederate hicks. Down with the gubmint! Abolish federal agencies!

Fucking hicks, amirite?

If you think Socialism gets you less government...

[Skeeve]

Is this a good as thread to any to point out that Democrats are trying to burn the bridges from the #walkaway crowd by going full commie?

Tweets today about winning back people including a call for an end to deplatforming:
https://i.redditmedia.com/i08bDbmLsKaDv ... a5f8cd6aa3[/img]

Preditable result, radical democrat extremists try to mount pressure to fire him:
https://i.imgur.com/f1evB6A.png[/img]

But #WalkAway seems to be taking off.
The #WalkAway meme is what happens when everything is viral and nothing matters

...
#WalkAway, the hashtag, went viral this weekend, as something of a delayed reaction to a popular video renouncing liberalism by Brandon Straka, who described himself to the Epoch Times as a New York hairdresser and aspiring actor. The video,posted in late May, now has more than 1 million views on Facebook. In it, Straka says he was once a liberal, but now he is not.

“If you are a person of color, an LGBT person, a woman or an American immigrant, the Democratic Party wants you to know you are a victim,” Straka says in the video. “This is perhaps the Democratic Party’s greatest, and most insidious, lie.”

[corplinx]

[Abdul Alhazred]

Bernie Sanders failed the purity test, oh my.

He is a socialist.

Was there ever a socialist country with anything like open borders?

It is inherently incompatible with a welfare state, let alone real central planning.

[Giz]

Was there ever a socialist country with anything like open borders?

.

Traditionally It's only a problem getting out.

[Abdul Alhazred]

No less a lefty icon than Cesar Chavez was dead set against open borders, to the point of organized snitching on illegals.

Hiring illegals being a union busting tactic, you see.

[RCC: Act II]

Do you want regulated immigration or black market immigration?

The one that avoids atrocities?

I mean, if we are in the business of looking to sociopathic loons for guidance, I can beat Trump:

If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?

We're long past the point where the problems caused by open borders are worse than the way we've had to debase law and order to maintain them. The 100 mile thing is a whole load of shit. Sure, have checkpoints. Try to keep some sense of control, but when it comes to wholesale jailing of people and wanting to deport people without any due process and making small children represent themselves in court without counsel, again:

If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?

Same with the war on drugs. Doesn't mean I'm for selling crack out of primary school vending machines. Just that at some point more problems are caused than solved by being zealots about it.

These two issues were really useful to those who weren't exactly down with the liberty/security thing that Ben Franklin went on about.

[Grammatron]

The one that avoids atrocities?

That would be the human trafficking opportunities that are presented with open borders. Yet you seem to be advocating for open borders.

We're long past the point where the problems caused by open borders are worse than the way we've had to debase law and order to maintain them.

On one hand we have attempts at enforcing immigration policies, on the other hand we have millions of people who have very little knowledge of our laws and difference concepts of orders. To me the latter is more of a debasing of the system.

The 100 mile thing is a whole load of shit. Sure, have checkpoints. Try to keep some sense of control, but when it comes to wholesale jailing of people and wanting to deport people without any due process and making small children represent themselves in court without counsel, again:

I don't understand how you can support checkpoints and "some sense of control" but bemoan immigration policies against those who actively avoid those checkpoints

Same with the war on drugs. Doesn't mean I'm for selling crack out of primary school vending machines. Just that at some point more problems are caused than solved by being zealots about it.

These two issues were really useful to those who weren't exactly down with the liberty/security thing that Ben Franklin went on about.

I see a pretty clear path personally:

Serious border control > Decriminalize possession of drugs > Shift resources from drug wars in the cities to treatment and more policing and searches at ports of entry.

Can't have that without a wall (or similar serious border control)

[RCC: Act II]

I don't understand how you can support checkpoints and "some sense of control" but bemoan immigration policies against those who actively avoid those checkpoints
)

Sometimes people get away with things because there is no way to stop it without wholesale violations of civil liberties and/or human rights violations.

When does it end? At some point it becomes a question of shooting people. Is that the line?

[Grammatron]

I don't understand how you can support checkpoints and "some sense of control" but bemoan immigration policies against those who actively avoid those checkpoints

Sometimes people get away with things because there is no way to stop it without wholesale violations of civil liberties and/or human rights violations.

I'm sorry I don't agree with the premise that people should get away with certain things.

The reality is that supporting open borders now is accepting a likely support of human chain of misery.

When does it end? At some point it becomes a question of shooting people. Is that the line?

Why must it end in such violence? Where do all these blood fantasies come from?

[ed]

People would probably be better off being here than in some south american shithole. You'd probably be better off squatting in my home and having me take care of you.

Letting people in to alter the outcome of future elections is unacceptable. Letting them in because it is better here than "there" is equally unacceptable. The only question is what do they bring to the party. Cheap lettuce is a non-starter.

Can anyone argue for open borders? If not, then we are talking about maintaining a traditional national sovereignty and, therefore, enforcement.

[Abdul Alhazred]

Cheap lettuce is a non-starter.

Combines for harvesting wheat were used in the 19th century, but for cotton not extensively until after WWII. Think about that.

Can good old Yankee ingenuity come up with a lettuce combine given enough economic incentive?

[RCC: Act II]

When does it end? At some point it becomes a question of shooting people. Is that the line?

Why must it end in such violence? Where do all these blood fantasies come from?[/quote]

Unless you think the state should kill to prevent every crime, then at some point a state just has to concede that shit happens and let it go. Like it does now. Factually guilty people going free because of officer misconduct. We let it go. Only way to stop a shoplifter is to shoot him? Let him go. Etc.

Removing children from parents without even bothering to keep track is violence. Kidnapping is a violent crime most states punish quite harshly. Taking a child from parents based on a legal pretense and putting that child in some other permanent placement because you can't find the parents is child trafficking.

There's your chain of misery.

Illegal entry is a misdemeanor by comparison.

I think a government apparatus that will snatch children without any due process and without any plan of reunification is capable of pretty much anything, and that those that defend the former will continue to defend the latter.

[WildCat]

Cheap lettuce is a non-starter.

Combines for harvesting wheat were used in the 19th century, but for cotton not extensively until after WWII. Think about that.

Can good old Yankee ingenuity come up with a lettuce combine given enough economic incentive?

Fruits and many vegetables have to be picked when ripe and they don't all ripen at the same time so a machine that harvests everything will greatly reduce yields.

[ed]

Fine. So lettuce will become the province of the snoflake elites.

"Let them eat lettuce"

Idont give a shit

[Abdul Alhazred]

Fine. So lettuce will become the province of the snoflake elites.

"Let them eat lettuce"

Idont give a shit

I posit that a proper lettuce (or fruit) picking machine could be built if there were enough incentive to put in the engineering effort.

Not that one could merely slap one together from off the shelf parts.

Note that cotton grown outside the USA is still picked by hand, yet we are still a major producer.

[ed]

When does it end? At some point it becomes a question of shooting people. Is that the line?

Why must it end in such violence? Where do all these blood fantasies come from?

Unless you think the state should kill to prevent every crime, then at some point a state just has to concede that shit happens and let it go. Like it does now. Factually guilty people going free because of officer misconduct. We let it go. Only way to stop a shoplifter is to shoot him? Let him go. Etc.

Removing children from parents without even bothering to keep track is violence. Kidnapping is a violent crime most states punish quite harshly. Taking a child from parents based on a legal pretense and putting that child in some other permanent placement because you can't find the parents is child trafficking.

There's your chain of misery.

Illegal entry is a misdemeanor by comparison.

I think a government apparatus that will snatch children without any due process and without any plan of reunification is capable of pretty much anything, and that those that defend the former will continue to defend the latter.

Putting ones child in harms way is also criminal.
I see a lot of complaining but damn little of a productive nature.

[Nyarlathotep]

You guys realize that all your quotes have become so fucked up that it's hard to tell who really said what, don't you?

[ed]

Sorry

[xouper]

Just for Ny, who won't see this anyway since he claims to be ignoring me:

I don't understand how you can support checkpoints and "some sense of control" but bemoan immigration policies against those who actively avoid those checkpoints

Sometimes people get away with things because there is no way to stop it without wholesale violations of civil liberties and/or human rights violations.

When does it end? At some point it becomes a question of shooting people. Is that the line?

Why must it end in such violence? Where do all these blood fantasies come from?

Unless you think the state should kill to prevent every crime, then at some point a state just has to concede that shit happens and let it go. Like it does now. Factually guilty people going free because of officer misconduct. We let it go. Only way to stop a shoplifter is to shoot him? Let him go. Etc.

Removing children from parents without even bothering to keep track is violence. Kidnapping is a violent crime most states punish quite harshly. Taking a child from parents based on a legal pretense and putting that child in some other permanent placement because you can't find the parents is child trafficking.

There's your chain of misery.

Illegal entry is a misdemeanor by comparison.

I think a government apparatus that will snatch children without any due process and without any plan of reunification is capable of pretty much anything, and that those that defend the former will continue to defend the latter.

Putting ones child in harms way is also criminal.
I see a lot of complaining but damn little of a productive nature.