(09-23-2018 04:01 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(09-23-2018 03:33 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-23-2018 03:28 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(09-23-2018 03:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-23-2018 03:14 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Perfect example of how even the more-left leaning candidates publicly advocate that abolishing ICE is about reinventing immigration policy and not just, as the most cynical will say, creating open borders for votes. Yes, some lawmakers will probably try and abolish deportations in general, but that is the fringe we’re talking about.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theatla...le/564752/

Anyways, not trying to advocate one way or the other, just pointing out that there are lots of quotes and evidence of Dems advocating for the abolishment of ICE in a way that doesn’t result in a complete halting of immigration enforcement.

And Ocasio makes it clear she opposes it because of "deportation". Apparently "deportation" of illegal aliens "doesnt work" (her words) for her.

It is spoken eloquently but the main point is still there when you actually read it. Apparently "deportation" is "cruel" and "abus[ive]".
Funny stuff.

I’m confused. We were talking about the repercussions of abolishing ICE, not issues with ICE and why people wanted to abolish ICE.

Again, even Cortez is saying that abolishing ICE would result in enforcing immigration policy, just in a reformed manner.

So 'build the wall' and 'make america great again' is shorthand for keep all the brown people out, and 'Abolish ICE' means 'Gee Wally, lets ponder various methods of immigration reform.'

This Orwellian doublespeak where 'x really means y' stuff keeps getting better and better. Pretty soon I wont be able to make the OK sign with my hand before someone pops a cork....

This is as good as Robert using the subject of his trying to walk away from a crash he caused while drunk as snot as a bootstrap to social justice.

Tell me Lad, when I say 'The Department of Energy should be broken apart and the parts shot into the sun', do I get a free pass to say that *really* means 'perhaps we should have a lasting discussion about energy policy'? My take is that should sound right to you. Yes?

So wait, since you’re saying Build the Wall is attached to a more nuanced stance, then why can’t Abolish ICE be?

You’re trying to catch me on something that catches you on the very same thing... Lol. Heck, I’ve even said that a part of the abolish ICE platform is abolishing ICE, but it’s coupeld with policy changes that continue to carry out a lot of, if not all of, the same responsibilities. So it’s not X really means Y, it’s X really means X and Y, and Z, and AA, and so on. X is just the branding.

It’s almost as if one can say something isn’t working and should be stopped so a better solution can be created.

I have issues with Build the Wall because it’s a colossal waste of money and will likely be incredibly ineffective. I do think a lot of the support is rooted in anti-immigrant sentiment, just like how abolish ICE is rooted in a sentiment that believes our border policies are harmful. So I agree that they’re both built around sentiments that aren’t conveyed by the short hand.

But you get caught in that same issue Lad.

If you wish that stance the 'Build the Wall' means 'Build the Wall' for Lad.
Abolish ICE means 'gee Wally lets have a national discussion about immigration.'

And we each have one jig according to the other. Big improvement.

The issue that you seemingly overlook is that most people on your side actually think that 'Build the Wall' is codespeak for 'keep the mudpeople out', havent you heard? I guess you have heard, you just stated your belief in that above. How about them apples?

What is 'lets get rid of the Energy Department' codespeak for?

Quote: I do think a lot of the support is rooted in anti-immigrant sentiment, just like how abolish ICE is rooted in a sentiment that believes our border policies are harmful in open borders.

Fixed your attempt at demonization of one side and soft padding of the other. Nice try though.

I guess I should say "'Build the Wall' is rooted in a sentiment that believes our border policies are harmful, jsut like how Abolish ICE is rooted in a sentiment that believes in open borders" if I want to exhibit the same soft peddle knee jerk but reverse bias, but in reverse, that your first attempt conveyed.