Dumb Political Correctness

When did we start holding the POTUS to the standard of the boisterous friend at the bar? Y'all are literally comparing what some random tweeting guy says to the POTUS. When comparing the comments to "liberals" that's what you are doing in essence. Can we lower the bar any further? Next it will be "well the BLM or KKK uses this language so why not Trump"? I've never voted for a buddy to POTUS because guess what...they'd suck at the job. We collectively need to raise our standards again rather than lowering them simply to justify the malfeasence of our team captain's behavior.

Pure garbage. I didn't defend or excuse what he said. I said that the people complaining about this the loudest are the ones who use the exact same phrases and feel the exact same way about parts of this country as well as some of those third world countries Trump was likely mentioning.

It takes zero moral courage to sit there in a meeting, listen to the comments, smile and nod, and then leak the comment to the press. That may be your idea of "stepping up against bigotry." Mine would be to say "Mr. President, that's not appropriate language, and we shouldn't be talking about those nations like that." Wouldn't that be the "higher standard?"

But this was all about posturing, virtue signaling, and wrecking DACA so that it wouldn't be taken away as a battering ram in an election year. They're going to push for a no-strings DACA bill as has already been said by Durbin: "this is the GOP's chance to prove they're not racist!"

It's an ideal that is dying and this "faux outrage" is trying to save it while some on this board kick dirt on the ideal as it's being lowered into the ground, fearful that someone else might beat them to the dream by working harder.

Yeah... the outraged are all noble with pure motives, and the people who are calling them on their hypocrisy are just doing it because they're lazy and think that immigrants will outwork them. You've clearly got a solid handle on this discussion.
 
So the standard of behavior is set by the foul mouthest of the opponents? My mom raised me to believe "they did it too was" a non-starter. Now, I guess, when judging the behavior of the president of the United States, it's the only reasonable standard.

By the way, I hang with Democrats, though admittedly educated ones, not the foul mouthed ones know well by others in this group. ******** isn't a word that comes up much.
 
So the standard of behavior is set by the foul mouthest of the opponents?

Why do I sometimes feel like there's some macro that's only visible on other posters' screens, that takes what I say, adds a bunch of more inflammatory stuff to it and then reposts it. What standard of behavior exactly have I condoned?
 
When did we start holding the POTUS to the standard of the boisterous friend at the bar? Y'all are literally comparing what some random tweeting guy says to the POTUS. When comparing the comments to "liberals" that's what you are doing in essence. Can we lower the bar any further? Next it will be "well the BLM or KKK uses this language so why not Trump"? I've never voted for a buddy to POTUS because guess what...they'd suck at the job. We collectively need to raise our standards again rather than lowering them simply to justify the malfeasence of our team captain's behavior.

What's surprising in this conversation is that bystander's father would be one of the people that Trump is lambasting with this language. bystander is a testament to the success his father brought to bear through a solid work ethic and what appears to be a desire for a better life for himself and his family. That's the personification of the American Dream. It's an ideal that is dying and this "faux outrage" is trying to save it while some on this board kick dirt on the ideal as it's being lowered into the ground, fearful that someone else might beat them to the dream by working harder.

It's a complicated thing to analyze my Father. He was the epitome of the immigrant who came over and made it. He also was a very staunch Libertarian. He was a live and let live guy all the way but don't ask him to pay for your mistakes. You own them. It's not that he wasn't compassionate because he was on a human level; one on one. I know he helped many people including Cuban refugees who he brought into our home for a night's sleep and guidance on making their way to Miami. He was almost an underground railroad kind of guy in that regard (much to my mother's chagrin; she would joke about how he trusted them because they were Cuban which was the exact reason she didn't trust them! Ha).

He was known as a kick you in the tail kind of a coach because all the men who played for him when they were in little league have told me so. No crying, you know. Get up there and compete or get off the field. Practice hard and practice at home. That was life to him and though he suffered discrimination in his time (remember, we were in Tallahassee during the 60's. George Wallace country. Confederate flags everywhere and the N word used liberally by children who heard it at home) he continue onward and upward. That was my upbringing. So what kind of politics comes out of that? Well I was a Conservative for a very long time primarily because of him and his absolute distrust of an all powerful central government; but add in the fact that he wholeheartedly believed in the separation of church and state and that's why I think my bias has settled in as a very moderate Democrat.

My Dad was no fan of Che Guevara or Castro and was a Bay of Pigs kind of a guy. He also supported Argentina during the Falklands Island "war." He said they were really known as Las Malvinas and that the American public sided with England because we had an emotional, unconditional love for England and not for Argentina, meaning if the American people knew the truth they would have had a different opinion. He mocked college students who would wear a shirt with that famous picture of Che as idiots. He didn't have much sympathy for Che's arguments about Bautista's corruption or the effects United Fruit had on Latin America because he said Che was a murderer. So it negated everything. But my Dad knew about ALL that stuff. He knew Bautista was corrupt to the core and he (my Dad) supported the revolution; UNTIL Castro turned against the very things he preached in his famous, "History Will Absolve Me" speech made in court after he was captured trying to overthrow Bautista back in 1954 (I believe). I read the entire speech. He liberally quoted from our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. He made a brilliant case for a coup because it was for the people. Well, what happened to that guy? He seemed to forget what he said but my Father didn't. He said they had spies everywhere and their freedoms were locked away. He hated Castro and never forgave him. He took that to his grave. I grew up with that story as a child ringing in my ears. I'm not really making a point here, but relaying the different points of view to which I was exposed.

I don't know what he would have thought of Trump to be perfectly honest. I've been thinking about it a long time. I believe he approved of Antonin Scalia so that tells you about his beliefs. He was a Machiavellian in many ways and I believe in the end he would have held his nose and possibly supported Trump in order to avoid another Sotomayor or Ginsberg on SCOTUS. I don't think he would have ever expected Trump to have won. I never expected him to win. I get what he is doing with his agenda because it's from the right. I can predict his every move as probably each of you can. But his personal style is unprecedented as President is it not? This sh*t-hole stuff is being over-blown in my view but at the same time I don't like hearing that from him. There is no need for it. I'm sticking to the agenda and not the impeachment talk. All it will do is make Pence President. He's classier by far but he is a Christian, possibly a Dominionist.

My Dad was about law and order and a strict Constructionist. Would he have been offended by Trump? It's hard to say. Maybe. He had thin skin at times but it didn't affect his motivation to succeed. It would just piss him off and make him want to do greater things. I may have mentioned it before; he was 5' 5" tall and admitted to having hang-ups about his height. Well, that little man represented Cuba in gymnastics three times in the Olympics, won a gold medal in the Pan American games and received a full-ride to Florida State University. They had a world-class team back then. And he was a world-class Father who told me to do my best and not be stupid. The rest of it I guess was just talk over cigars and scotch.
 
Last edited:
So the standard of behavior is set by the foul mouthest of the opponents? My mom raised me to believe "they did it too was" a non-starter. Now, I guess, when judging the behavior of the president of the United States, it's the only reasonable standard.

By the way, I hang with Democrats, though admittedly educated ones, not the foul mouthed ones know well by others in this group. ******** isn't a word that comes up much.

I'm fine with Democrats. I'm one myself. The Liberals among us (not referring to this site) are obvious. They are vile and act like trolls. They believe they are inerrant and cannot be reasoned with. That, in my view is why the Republican Party became the party of No. That is why Trump was able to win the election. Trump to me is the epitome of blow-back.
 
I'm fine with Democrats. I'm one myself. The Liberals among us (not referring to this site) are obvious. They are vile and act like trolls. They believe they are inerrant and cannot be reasoned with. That, in my view is why the Republican Party became the party of No. That is why Trump was able to win the election. Trump to me is the epitome of blow-back.

A lot of truth right here. I also would take the complaints of Trump more seriously if they had been more critical of Obama's behavior.
 
A lot of truth right here. I also would take the complaints of Trump more seriously if they had been more critical of Obama's behavior.

The trolls ignore quite a bit. They savaged Bush over the Iraq War but Congress voted for the resolution. Hillary voted for it though Bernie did not. Later, Obama ripped her during their 2008 primary debates but all was forgotten when she ran for President. Well, if she was morally unfit for office in 2008 what changed? We know the answer; in the end it's the agenda and that is exactly why Trump is being supported by "Trumpers" or whatever the trolls call them. Who would believe that anyone on the right would have preferred another Sotomayor (had Hillary won) over Gorsuch? We know the answer and in my view, the fight is not just in the propaganda but in the courts (and by Executive Order) because the trolls know their agenda cannot be achieved by Constitutional Amendment. So they must do it another way.
 
Last edited:
What standard of behavior exactly have I condoned?
Not you specifically. I catch a lot of robust Donald Trump defense through a variety of media. I don't mind hearing a little "He's my guy, but sometimes I wish he'd use a little tact."

Bystander ... yeah. My daughter was going to Democratic Congressional Debate Saturday and I thought about going with her. I thought it might be instructive to wear a Make America Great Again cap. And I'd tell those who spoke with me, "If you view the folks wearing this cap with contempt ... how are you ever going to win them over?"

I had a dozen things I really needed to do around the house, so I missed the chance. Dialogue instead of entertaining those with whom you already agree. It's hard, often unpleasant, work since it requires listening and self evaluation.
 
We must remember a different presidency. Obama seemed way more reticent and dignified.

Some of his comments like "typical white person" and calling tea party members " teabaggers" are not exactly dignified. Neither is the "clinging to guns or bible" statement either. Trump's vulgarity doesn't really bother me since I'm pretty vulgar myself.
 
Not you specifically. I catch a lot of robust Donald Trump defense through a variety of media. I don't mind hearing a little "He's my guy, but sometimes I wish he'd use a little tact."

Bystander ... yeah. My daughter was going to Democratic Congressional Debate Saturday and I thought about going with her. I thought it might be instructive to wear a Make America Great Again cap. And I'd tell those who spoke with me, "If you view the folks wearing this cap with contempt ... how are you ever going to win them over?"

I had a dozen things I really needed to do around the house, so I missed the chance. Dialogue instead of entertaining those with whom you already agree. It's hard, often unpleasant, work since it requires listening and self evaluation.

But they would probably say, "How can you expect to win us over wearing that hat?"
I believe they view that saying as racially charged because it was "used" against Obama. To drill down further, they would ask you, "When was America great?" That's a loaded question because if you go back far enough, then America was only great for white people in their view because you're now in the Jim Crow era. So it's a sensitive thing.
 
Pure garbage. I didn't defend or excuse what he said. I said that the people complaining about this the loudest are the ones who use the exact same phrases and feel the exact same way about parts of this country as well as some of those third world countries Trump was likely mentioning.

Garbage? Let's breakdown your post.

Here's a third: As gross and inappropriate as it was, Trump wasn't saying this in a speech. He was saying this in what he naively thought was an internal discussion (which goes to prove that Trump still isn't truly a conservative, because he doesn't see himself that way and honestly believes that the democrats will like him if he works with them, and so why would they be looking for chances to crucify him in the media?)

Good start. "Gross and inappropriate" would have been fine. You then let him off the hook with "naively thought it was an internal discussion". Seriously, is the comment appropriate in any discussion as POTUS? We aren't talking a Hornsfan discussion between you and I but rather the leader of the free world.

Next...
Here's a fourth: Dick Durbin and Harry Reed have both made up facts and/or statements about GOP rivals in the past, and while I still tend to believe that Trump probably said this, it doesn't change the fact that this appears to be a stunt meant to derail the DACA talks or try to gain leverage to force Trump to sign a blank check. Schumer and Durbin are pure scumbags, and if they were the source of this information, I'd say they were lying. As it is, who knows what was said.

LOL, every acknowledgement that Trump actually said this is followed by an attack on the other "team". Is that involuntary?

Here's a fifth: liberals can't say "sh**thole" enough when talking about places they don't like - usually referring to Southern states or cities. I have zero patience for the hypocrisy of hyperventilation about a sentiment that they express on a continual basis about most of this country, and one which is openly touted by leftists whenever you put a mike or a keyboard in front of them. Let's go ask someone in Hollywood what they think about moving to Des Moines. See what they say.

Here is where you lower the standard. Because some "liberal" or "leftist" has said it then that means what? It's OK for the POTUS? That any liberal is a hypocrite for saying the POTUS should have more dignity than others on their political spectrum? Again, simply an attempt to muddy the waters getting further and further from saying unequivocally that this language from the POTUS is wrong, in any context.

Here's a sixth: Trump needs to shut his trap, put away his phone, and govern. He may or may not be a racist as how I would define it (i.e. hates people based on their race), but he certainly fits the definition based on how society views it today. So if people want to call him that, great. I don't feel compelled to defend him. But every time he says something stupid, leftists come out and make it impossible to agree with them because their conclusions are so hysterical that they defy any common reason.

Notice this pattern? Every attempt to hold Trump accountable devolves into a "those liberals" rant? Seriously, what does it matter what some liberal thinks other than I'm sure it's painful to see your team leader be held accountable. Every time Trump's supporters respond with a "but but but those liberals" treatise after his latest malfeasance you simply prop him up a little bit more and give him more justification to not correct what you imply is abhorrent behavior. In fact, some even cheer it on (alt-right). Stand up...hold your team leader accountable when deserved without the whatabout-isms.
 
Last edited:
It's a complicated thing to analyze my Father. He was the epitome of the immigrant who came over and made it. He also was a very staunch Libertarian. He was a live and let live guy all the way but don't ask him to pay for your mistakes. You own them. It's not that he wasn't compassionate because he was on a human level; one on one. I know he helped many people including Cuban refugees who he brought into our home for a night's sleep and guidance on making their way to Miami. He was almost an underground railroad kind of guy in that regard (much to my mother's chagrin; she would joke about how he trusted them because they were Cuban which was the exact reason she didn't trust them! Ha).

He was known as a kick you in the tail kind of a coach because all the men who played for him when they were in little league have told me so. No crying, you know. Get up there and compete or get off the field. Practice hard and practice at home. That was life to him and though he suffered discrimination in his time (remember, we were in Tallahassee during the 60's. George Wallace country. Confederate flags everywhere and the N word used liberally by children who heard it at home) he continue onward and upward. That was my upbringing. So what kind of politics comes out of that? Well I was a Conservative for a very long time primarily because of him and his absolute distrust of an all powerful central government; but add in the fact that he wholeheartedly believed in the separation of church and state and that's why I think my bias has settled in as a very moderate Democrat.

My Dad was no fan of Che Guevara or Castro and was a Bay of Pigs kind of a guy. He also supported Argentina during the Falklands Island "war." He said they were really known as Las Malvinas and that the American public sided with England because we had an emotional, unconditional love for England and not for Argentina, meaning if the American people knew the truth they would have had a different opinion. He mocked college students who would wear a shirt with that famous picture of Che as idiots. He didn't have much sympathy for Che's arguments about Bautista's corruption or the effects United Fruit had on Latin America because he said Che was a murderer. So it negated everything. But my Dad knew about ALL that stuff. He knew Bautista was corrupt to the core and he (my Dad) supported the revolution; UNTIL Castro turned against the very things he preached in his famous, "History Will Absolve Me" speech made in court after he was captured trying to overthrow Bautista back in 1954 (I believe). I read the entire speech. He liberally quoted from our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. He made a brilliant case for a coup because it was for the people. Well, what happened to that guy? He seemed to forget what he said but my Father didn't. He said they had spies everywhere and their freedoms were locked away. He hated Castro and never forgave him. He took that to his grave. I grew up with that story as a child ringing in my ears. I'm not really making a point here, but relaying the different points of view to which I was exposed.

I don't know what he would have thought of Trump to be perfectly honest. I've been thinking about it a long time. I believe he approved of Antonin Scalia so that tells you about his beliefs. He was a Machiavellian in many ways and I believe in the end he would have held his nose and possibly supported Trump in order to avoid another Sotomayor or Ginsberg on SCOTUS. I don't think he would have ever expected Trump to have won. I never expected him to win. I get what he is doing with his agenda because it's from the right. I can predict his every move as probably each of you can. But his personal style is unprecedented as President is it not? This sh*t-hole stuff is being over-blown in my view but at the same time I don't like hearing that from him. There is no need for it. I'm sticking to the agenda and not the impeachment talk. All it will do is make Pence President. He's classier by far but he is a Christian, possibly a Dominionist.

My Dad was about law and order and a strict Constructionist. Would he have been offended by Trump? It's hard to say. Maybe. He had thin skin at times but it didn't affect his motivation to succeed. It would just piss him off and make him want to do greater things. I may have mentioned it before; he was 5' 5" tall and admitted to having hang-ups about his height. Well, that little man represented Cuba in gymnastics three times in the Olympics, won a gold medal in the Pan American games and received a full-ride to Florida State University. They had a world-class team back then. And he was a world-class Father who told me to do my best and not be stupid. The rest of it I guess was just talk over cigars and scotch.

Thanks for sharing your story, bystander. Do you think your father would support the implication that we only look for immigrants from countries like the US? In today's world, your father would be a "deport" candidate. Of course, the Cubans were the reason Trump won Florida so they may not be a target like other sh!thole countries.
 
Of course, the Cubans were the reason Trump won Florida so they may not be a target like other sh!thole countries.

From the articles I read, Trump was talking about a list of countries on the “Temprorary Protected Status” list, almost all of which are widely considered to be the least developed countries on earth. Some have had recent civil wars likes Syria.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporary_protected_status

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_Developed_Countries

Trump was not picking out random countries or going by race. I do not know what the status of the original inhabitants was, but in modern history, Cuba has never been one of the least developed countries on Earth even with its various dictators and colonial interventions holding Cuba back from realizing her full potential. While I am sure Cuba, like all countries, has some ****hole parts, it has never been a ****hole and I doubt Trump would call it one given the context.

I agree with many of the above posters where I do not like feeling like I am defending Trump. I am not defending his statements. That said, from the reporting I have read, he was clearly talking about a specific group of the least well-off countries, not just general random non-first world countries or countries by race.
 
From the articles I read, Trump was talking about a list of countries on the “Temprorary Protected Status” list, almost all of which are widely considered to be the least developed countries on earth. Some have had recent civil wars likes Syria.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporary_protected_status

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_Developed_Countries

Trump was not picking out random countries or going by race. I do not know what the status of the original inhabitants was, but in modern history, Cuba has never been one of the least developed countries on Earth even with its various dictators and colonial interventions holding Cuba back from realizing her full potential. While I am sure Cuba, like all countries, has some ****hole parts, it has never been a ****hole and I doubt Trump would call it one given the context.

I agree with many of the above posters where I do not like feeling like I am defending Trump. I am not defending his statements. That said, from the reporting I have read, he was clearly talking about a specific group of the least well-off countries, not just general random non-first world countries or countries by race.

I'm not saying you are wrong but how is "Africa" a "Temporary Protected status" and then he went on to say he wanted more immigrants from countries like "Norway". This could simply be Trump's in-eloquent way of saying "I don't want the indigent people of this world, give me it's educated, affluent and athletic" which is what his immigration proposal states. I do understand that the bi-partisan proposal he was addressing though cut 50% from current numbers, still allocated some visas to countries that don't have as many of the people Trump wants as others.
 
It's a complicated thing to analyze my Father. He was the epitome of the immigrant who came over and made it. He also was a very staunch Libertarian. He was a live and let live guy all the way but don't ask him to pay for your mistakes. You own them. It's not that he wasn't compassionate because he was on a human level; one on one. I know he helped many people including Cuban refugees who he brought into our home for a night's sleep and guidance on making their way to Miami. He was almost an underground railroad kind of guy in that regard (much to my mother's chagrin; she would joke about how he trusted them because they were Cuban which was the exact reason she didn't trust them! Ha).

He was known as a kick you in the tail kind of a coach because all the men who played for him when they were in little league have told me so. No crying, you know. Get up there and compete or get off the field. Practice hard and practice at home. That was life to him and though he suffered discrimination in his time (remember, we were in Tallahassee during the 60's. George Wallace country. Confederate flags everywhere and the N word used liberally by children who heard it at home) he continue onward and upward. That was my upbringing. So what kind of politics comes out of that? Well I was a Conservative for a very long time primarily because of him and his absolute distrust of an all powerful central government; but add in the fact that he wholeheartedly believed in the separation of church and state and that's why I think my bias has settled in as a very moderate Democrat.

My Dad was no fan of Che Guevara or Castro and was a Bay of Pigs kind of a guy. He also supported Argentina during the Falklands Island "war." He said they were really known as Las Malvinas and that the American public sided with England because we had an emotional, unconditional love for England and not for Argentina, meaning if the American people knew the truth they would have had a different opinion. He mocked college students who would wear a shirt with that famous picture of Che as idiots. He didn't have much sympathy for Che's arguments about Bautista's corruption or the effects United Fruit had on Latin America because he said Che was a murderer. So it negated everything. But my Dad knew about ALL that stuff. He knew Bautista was corrupt to the core and he (my Dad) supported the revolution; UNTIL Castro turned against the very things he preached in his famous, "History Will Absolve Me" speech made in court after he was captured trying to overthrow Bautista back in 1954 (I believe). I read the entire speech. He liberally quoted from our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. He made a brilliant case for a coup because it was for the people. Well, what happened to that guy? He seemed to forget what he said but my Father didn't. He said they had spies everywhere and their freedoms were locked away. He hated Castro and never forgave him. He took that to his grave. I grew up with that story as a child ringing in my ears. I'm not really making a point here, but relaying the different points of view to which I was exposed.

I don't know what he would have thought of Trump to be perfectly honest. I've been thinking about it a long time. I believe he approved of Antonin Scalia so that tells you about his beliefs. He was a Machiavellian in many ways and I believe in the end he would have held his nose and possibly supported Trump in order to avoid another Sotomayor or Ginsberg on SCOTUS. I don't think he would have ever expected Trump to have won. I never expected him to win. I get what he is doing with his agenda because it's from the right. I can predict his every move as probably each of you can. But his personal style is unprecedented as President is it not? This sh*t-hole stuff is being over-blown in my view but at the same time I don't like hearing that from him. There is no need for it. I'm sticking to the agenda and not the impeachment talk. All it will do is make Pence President. He's classier by far but he is a Christian, possibly a Dominionist.

My Dad was about law and order and a strict Constructionist. Would he have been offended by Trump? It's hard to say. Maybe. He had thin skin at times but it didn't affect his motivation to succeed. It would just piss him off and make him want to do greater things. I may have mentioned it before; he was 5' 5" tall and admitted to having hang-ups about his height. Well, that little man represented Cuba in gymnastics three times in the Olympics, won a gold medal in the Pan American games and received a full-ride to Florida State University. They had a world-class team back then. And he was a world-class Father who told me to do my best and not be stupid. The rest of it I guess was just talk over cigars and scotch.
I just last weekend binge-watched all 8 episodes of a documentary on Cuba called the Cuba Libre Story. So, I actually tracked with everything you said, whereas a week ago I would not have. Che Guevara, United Fruit, History will absolve... Fascinating history.
 
2 points on the sh!thole comments.

  1. The comment themselves are not racist but put in the context of many comments he's made before that border on racism it is quickly becoming clear that our POTUS is racist. It may be born of ignorance, narcissism or nationalism or all of the above but he is racist. I've been careful not to say this previously but when reviewing the totality of his comments on Mexicans (immigrants or the judge), muslims, asians, blacks or broad statements like this the fact is inescapable.
  2. What's being missed in most of the analysis is that Trump is applying broad sterotypes and making policy decisions on those not on actual data. For example, if you look at immigrants from Nigeria they have a higher college degree rate than the overall US rate (40% to 33%). Most immigrants have a quality that Americans are losing more and more...work ethic. It's that work ethic that has made Americans "soft" and moreso with each subsequent generation that is more affluent than their parents. Painting these countries with broad condemnations and applying that to the individuals is the true insult.
How can you talk about immigration changes without someone accusing you of talking about race?
 
I just last weekend binge-watched all 8 episodes of a documentary on Cuba called the Cuba Libre Story. So, I actually tracked with everything you said, whereas a week ago I would not have. Che Guevara, United Fruit, History will absolve... Fascinating history.
Same as in many Asian countries where the right is held to a higher standard than the murdering leftists.
 
No idea how to do quotes: but Bystander said: "All it will do is make Pence President. He's classier by far but he is a Christian,". I can remember when being a Christian in America was a positive. Now for even an ex-conservative turned moderate democrat it's a non-starter for president. Sad, very, very sad....
 
I just last weekend binge-watched all 8 episodes of a documentary on Cuba called the Cuba Libre Story. So, I actually tracked with everything you said, whereas a week ago I would not have. Che Guevara, United Fruit, History will absolve... Fascinating history.

Ha. I'm glad my comments match up with the documentary! It is a fascinating history. My take on Cuba is this: it has never had a period of stability from the time it was "discovered" by the bold maraudors" (Richard and Mimi Farina reference) from Europe. Even when they expelled the Spaniards they were dominated by the US.

The thing about these islands is that they are one or two-trick pony economies. Add in a large dose of corruption and you get a ****-hole.

Bold Marauder by Mimi and Richard Farina. Mimi was Joan Baez' sister:

 
Last edited:
No idea how to do quotes: but Bystander said: "All it will do is make Pence President. He's classier by far but he is a Christian,". I can remember when being a Christian in America was a positive. Now for even an ex-conservative turned moderate democrat it's a non-starter for president. Sad, very, very sad....

I'm not saying being a Christian is a non-starter. But I think a Christian who is against gay marriage and would make abortion illegal to be a problem in my moderate Democrat philosophy. I am fearful of religion in government. But the primary purpose of my comment was to point out that if the Left gets rid of Trump they will have Pence to contend with. I mentioned Pence being a Christian because I am of the belief (based upon years of reading the comments of hard left feminist, atheist/secular types) that a Dominionist/Rapturist type is of great concern to avowed Liberals. In my view, Pence is as much their enemy as is Trump but in different ways.

I think there have been concerns about Christians in the past unless you consider being a Catholic not being a Christian. JFK flew down to Houston long ago to speak to a group of Protestant clergymen. He assured them that he did not answer to the Pope and that he believed in the separation of church and state. Ironic eh? He had to convince other Christians of that belief.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for sharing your story, bystander. Do you think your father would support the implication that we only look for immigrants from countries like the US? In today's world, your father would be a "deport" candidate. Of course, the Cubans were the reason Trump won Florida so they may not be a target like other sh!thole countries.

I'm not completely up on the context of Trump's alleged ****-hole comment but my Father was invited to the US by Florida State. He was recruited by one of their star gymnasts after they met at the Olympics. I don't know all the facts of that conversation but in theory, he was "desirable" to someone in the US. He remained and followed the legal path to citizenship.

I think in general my Father understood the need for an immigration policy which by its very existence implies, obviously or not, that some will be allowed in and some won't. He fully supported our policy of allowing Cubans in due to the oppression occurring in Cuba. It was a policy of safe harbor for political persecution. In my view, he would also have extended that policy to refugees of North Korea and any other citizen of a totalitarian nation that violates the most fundamental civil rights imaginable. In this regard, these people are being given most-favored status not because they are from countries like the US but instead because they are from countries wholly opposite of the US; true tyranny. And by extension, that would also cover Middle Eastern refugees in the middle of a civil war or being subjected to the horrors inflicted by ISIS.

But these are academic discussions. From some brief research I believe that immigrants from Europe who arrived at Ellis Island long ago were not all allowed in to the US. Some were sent back for a variety of reasons, all of which could be categorized under one general heading; undesirable. So it's nothing new to want to crack down today.

Would he consider what is happening today to be racist? Certainly to a degree. I think there is no doubt that there is an element in the US that greatly fears the culture of Mexico becoming too dominant here. That the loyalty to Mexico and its ways is very real. I believe that to a certain extent myself. But I think that is just an acknowledgment of a fact (the loyalty and cultural bias towards Mexico). What we must decide is if we care or not. Not about illegal immigration but instead about the cultural dilution and the clear possibility that what the US is, is not a true melting pot of a singular culture but instead a melting pot that can change it's flavor and color.

But he was a staunch supporter in general of an immigration policy similar to that which he followed. He came over before Castro's revolution. He was not a beneficiary of the special status Cuban's gained because of the oppression of Castro.

Interestingly, I had a Liberal who knew all of this about me and my family ask me what I would think if Cuban's were treated like everyone else. I was making arguments about enforcing our immigration laws (years before Trump became President, just like Bill Clinton made speeches in favor of strict enforcement) and this Liberal was trying to test my loyalties. He thought I was having it both ways; demanding strict enforcement while benefiting from the special Cuban policy. It took some of the starch out of his argument when I relayed that my Father came over prior to Castro's take-over. I also told him that and I am stating here for the record that I do not expect special favors for Cubans. I only am of the belief that political prisoners/refugees have historically had exemptions or a separate set of rules, just like someone who is picked up by a ship because they were drowning in the ocean.

It is also my understanding that many Jews were turned away during WWII. I don't know why. Certainly we knew about what was happening to them in Germany. Maybe that's why we were wholly supportive of the establishment of the nation of Israel (besides the Dominionist/Rapturist believers) in 1948 because the Jewish question was dominating the world's conscience at the time.

Immigration. Immigration. We need laws. We should enforce them.

I hope this is coherent. I get on a roll sometimes and my brain is all over the place.
 
Last edited:
I'm not saying you are wrong but how is "Africa" a "Temporary Protected status" and then he went on to say he wanted moreimmigrants from countries like "Norway".

Actually, you have a case of bad reporting. The original article said “Trump named hati and multiple nations in africa on the temporary protected status list” or something to that effect. Then I watched over the course of four hours as the media exagerated that quote into Trump saying “Africa” as a whole. It was rather amazing watching the media play a game of telephone. If you came into the story four or more hours after it broke, the media was claiming Trump said “africa”. I was not there for whatever Trump said, but the original story said Trump named nations in Africa. That is why I made comments earlier in the thread about his context. Like I said, I am not trying to defend him as he should not call any country a ****hole, but the media forces me into this position when they exaggerate to push the racism narrative.

I will also note the White House did not initially deny it, but denied it later. I am guessing Trump began denying that he said “Africa” which he may actually be telling the truth about for once based on the original story.

I will also add, maybe this comes from me having a low opinion of his IQ, but Trump always seems to suffer from recentcy bias. Trump just met with the prime minister of Norway that week and I honestly think, based on the past history of the way his brain seems to work, he only named Norway do them being a developed country that he had recently interacted with. What would have really been fun is if he had met with a representative of russia before that immigration and named them instead :smile1:
 
Last edited:
Would he consider what is happening today to be racist? Certainly to a degree. I think there is no doubt that there is an element in the US that greatly fears the culture of Mexico becoming too dominant here. That the loyalty to Mexico and its ways is very real. I believe that to a certain extent myself. But I think that is just an acknowledgment of a fact (the loyalty and cultural bias towards Mexico). What we must decide is if we care or not. Not about illegal immigration but instead about the cultural dilution and the clear possibility that what the US is, is not a true melting pot of a singular culture but instead a melting pot that can change it's flavor and color.

Maybe this comes from growing up in South Texas and having mexican family members, but I think mexican culture is great. However, I have posted on here before about this, a lot of Americans (especially white americans from the north) do really fear mexican culture for some reason and can be quite hateful about it.
 
Maybe this comes from growing up in South Texas and having mexican family members, but I think mexican culture is great. However, I have posted on here before about this, a lot of Americans (especially white americans from the north) do really fear mexican culture for some reason and can be quite hateful about it.

We moved to Laredo in 1970 and I went to school there 7th through high school graduation. I went back there every summer during college and maintain a very strong connection and relationship with many folks down there. I loved it. It's in my blood. But people see the Valley and the border and Mexico in general and say, "That is not us."

But what they miss is the family environment. I was there one weekend a few years ago and saw how people hugged and talked at the grocery store. You don't see it like that here in Austin. It inspired me to write this poem that was published in the paper down there:

Laredo

I was crying when I met you
My tears constantly flowing
An arrival steeped in sorrow
But a sweet memory began growing
You are the world
In a land called nowhere
A smile always to give
Your heart ready to share
So easy to live
Today a precious moment
Tomorrow, never a worry
Your fears always silent
I never wanted you
I did not belong
My heart now yearns
My love so strong
Always looking away
I now return your gaze
The land of my youth
Please accept my praise
It's not about manana
It's about today
Something that never ends
Something that never goes away
You listen to me
Showing how you care
It seems so important to you
Your love is everywhere
No beach of sand
No majestic mountain
Just human emotion
Bursting like a fountain
What one cannot see
One can feel
What one can see
Is love so real
I drive for miles
To experience your charm
The flatland all around
Like a sweet woman on my arm
You take your time
You help a stranger
You look into my eyes
And take me to your manger
So humble and full of dignity
Your women so beautiful and strong
Your men so valiant and proud
How could I have been so wrong?
Please accept my thanks
And my apology
I will be forever grateful
That you are a part of me
I once ran away
Now I run to you
Take me back Laredo
Tell me you love me too
Faith, family, friendship
The values that come from you
Recibe un abrazo fuerte
Por que te quiere mucho
 
Great poem! I spent 7 years in Austin. While I certainly enjoyed my time at UT, I am not a fan of Austin itself at all. I like South Texas better (though I know I am in a minority with this position) . You hit the nail on the head about one of the big reasons: The people down here are infinitely friendlier and kinder to one another than Austin. (Also, the mexican food in Austin is pretty terrible compared to anything between Brownsville and San Antonio.)
 
Great poem! I spent 7 years in Austin. While I certainly enjoyed my time at UT, I am not a fan of Austin itself at all. I certainly like South Texas better. You hit the nail on the head about one of the big reasons: The people down here are infinitely friendlier and kind to one another than Austin. (Also, the mexican food in Austin is pretty terrible compared to anything between Brownsville and San Antonio.)

It was something that I knew but it took years for the feeling to hit home. I graduated from college in 1980 and for the next 37 years lived in South Padre Island, Dallas, Houston and now Austin since 1994. My Dad lived there until he passed away three years ago. I visited often but I think I finally opened my heart or something that day when I was at the HEB and truly saw the town for what it really was. It was amazing. Abrazos and laughter and lingering at the grocery store. A true market place of love and family. People don't get that. The thing that is interesting is that people down there are all about the proverbial "family values" that is preached by the right. They just need someone to welcome them.

As for the poem (thank you by the way), I wrote it at the Triple C Steakhouse in Devine on the way back to Austin. I have been published in several anthologies and in the Laredo Morning Times for years but not much lately.

Here's my where some of my work is:

https://hubpages.com/@thesuburbanpoet
 
Last edited:
So the standard of behavior is set by the foul mouthest of the opponents? My mom raised me to believe "they did it too was" a non-starter. Now, I guess, when judging the behavior of the president of the United States, it's the only reasonable standard.

By the way, I hang with Democrats, though admittedly educated ones, not the foul mouthed ones know well by others in this group. ******** isn't a word that comes up much.
I bet the term “racist” comes up quite often.
 
As for the poem (thank you by the way), I wrote it at the Triple C Steakhouse in Devine on the way back to Austin.

Never thought I would see anyone reference the Triple C in Devine on Hornfans! :smile1:
 

Recent Threads

Back
Top