TexasCHLforum.com

Skiprr wrote:

mojo84 wrote:Speaking of Australia, notice how they treat illegal aliens.
Maybe we should adopt their policy on this.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... mmigrants/

The issue is not immigration. It's illegal immigration, accepting unvetted people claiming to be refugees and people from countries known to be friendly and supportive of terrorists. Liberals always try to reframe the issue.

When it comes to immigrating, the USA seems to rank pretty high. http://www.immigrationworld.com/etc/top ... le-easily/

Okay. So you said quickly what I spent 40 minutes typing...even found one of the same sources. I gotta learn to be more succinct and less long-winded. I tried to ask TAM for some lessons, but he said he was to busy writing....

parabelum wrote:

dale blanker wrote:

Skiprr wrote:Just a little level-check. On January 20, Donald Trump took the oath of office. His first day in office was Saturday, January 21; so during his term so far have been two weekends. Tomorrow, he will have been POTUS for two weeks.

Man, I sure wish he had more energy and a stronger work ethic. After two weeks, you'd think he'd have some work done to show for it.

Nominating Gorsuch to SCOTUS was a winner but I suspect most of the rest was for show. "See my signature?" {how silly?]

I hope we haven't ticked off Britain, Mexico, or Australia.

It's good to be supportive but our system's survival requires that we be critical too.

I agree we have to be critical.

Now, can you elucidate me on British, Mexican or Australian immigration policies and statistics?

Let's pretend I'm a prog, or in other words, I am too lazy to dig up facts on my own.

What policies do those countries have in place to safeguard the citizens of their respective Nations?

What about their immigration tolerances?

How much blood, drip for drip, have they shed for protection of minorities and oppressed, in contrast to US?

How much money, coin for coin, have they contributed towards promulgation of peace in the world, in contrast to US?

Lastly, how many of their citizens apply to come to US every year as opposed to US citizens applying for visas etc to Britain, Mexico or Australia?

Thanks and enjoy your afternoon.

bblhd672 wrote:You guys are obviously confusing Dale Blanker's use of left wing talking points as a request for actual facts to be presented.

bblhd672 wrote:You guys are obviously confusing Dale Blanker's use of left wing talking points as a request for actual facts to be presented.

dale blanker wrote:

bblhd672 wrote:You guys are obviously confusing Dale Blanker's use of left wing talking points as a request for actual facts to be presented.

Hmm, so any concern or criticism about the way the new administration is doing things is "left wing" or liberal???
Last I checked with my thesaurus liberal is a synonym for: Open-minded, Broadminded, Moderate, Freethinking, Tolerant, Generous.
On the other hand, Conservative is a synonym for: Old-fashioned, Traditional, Old School, Conventional, Conformist, Unadventurous.

Actually. both definitions sound good to me but I like to think of myself as an independent thinker, critical and objective.

If you can't reason and must resort to name-calling...

dhoobler wrote:Dale,
You do realize that your signature line contains implicit name calling, right?

dhoobler wrote:

dale blanker wrote:

bblhd672 wrote:You guys are obviously confusing Dale Blanker's use of left wing talking points as a request for actual facts to be presented.

Hmm, so any concern or criticism about the way the new administration is doing things is "left wing" or liberal???
Last I checked with my thesaurus liberal is a synonym for: Open-minded, Broadminded, Moderate, Freethinking, Tolerant, Generous.
On the other hand, Conservative is a synonym for: Old-fashioned, Traditional, Old School, Conventional, Conformist, Unadventurous.

Actually. both definitions sound good to me but I like to think of myself as an independent thinker, critical and objective.

If you can't reason and must resort to name-calling...

Let's talk about reason. This exchange started when I said there was a double standard for democrats vs republicans. I gave a REASON supporting my claim. Skiprr gave a REASON for why I was right. You argue, not that our REASONS are wrong, but try to change the subject to name calling. That does not sound REASONABLE to me.

dale blanker wrote:

dhoobler wrote:

dale blanker wrote:

bblhd672 wrote:You guys are obviously confusing Dale Blanker's use of left wing talking points as a request for actual facts to be presented.

Hmm, so any concern or criticism about the way the new administration is doing things is "left wing" or liberal???
Last I checked with my thesaurus liberal is a synonym for: Open-minded, Broadminded, Moderate, Freethinking, Tolerant, Generous.
On the other hand, Conservative is a synonym for: Old-fashioned, Traditional, Old School, Conventional, Conformist, Unadventurous.

Actually. both definitions sound good to me but I like to think of myself as an independent thinker, critical and objective.

If you can't reason and must resort to name-calling...

Let's talk about reason. This exchange started when I said there was a double standard for democrats vs republicans. I gave a REASON supporting my claim. Skiprr gave a REASON for why I was right. You argue, not that our REASONS are wrong, but try to change the subject to name calling. That does not sound REASONABLE to me.

Oops, I thought the topic was name-calling according to your post:

For the last eight years, anyone who was critical of former president Obama was branded as a racist. For the last two years, anyone who was critical Hillary's candidacy for president was presumed to be a misogynist.

Applying reason, one must conclude that there are two standards, one for democrats and another for republicans. Anyone who cannot understand that reasoning must be a bigot or a fool or a slave.

It seems like you somehow concluded from the examples in the 1st paragraph [with previous critics being referred to as racists or misogynists, and no names being applied to current critics] that the "double standard" referred to in the 2nd paragraph has to do with name-calling being all one-sided. What double standard are you really, really referring to?

dale blanker wrote:Oops, I thought the topic was name-calling....

mojo84 wrote:The DOJ filed the President's response, plea or whatever it's called with the appeals court. Hopefully, they or the SC will come to their senses.

ISIS is recruiting refugees as we argue and play silly word games.

mojo84 wrote:The DOJ filed the President's response, plea or whatever it's called with the appeals court. Hopefully, they or the SC will come to their senses.

ISIS is recruiting refugees as we argue and play silly word games.