POLITICS President Trump: 100+ Mornings After (Term 1 Complete)

Fair though I’m not sure analysis if required. He laid it out fairly clearly.

There democrats were getting ready to take over Texas politics if he didn’t act (re: motivation).

 

Right. Mix that with being crazy, and here we are. It was a damn Walmart. Not exactly liberal congregating location. He's nuts.

Healthcare, including mental healthcare, has to be addressed. Not in lieu of anything else, or anything. But it does need to be addressed.

 

I don’t think he was going after liberals. He seemed to be going to a place he knew he could find a lot of Hispanics. Was he even from El Paso? I know he went to school in Dallas - but it’s summer.

Did I read correctly that there were 3000 people in the store at the time?

 

People on both ends are quick to pile on if it fits what they want it to fit, whether white male, muslim, immigrant, dem/rep etc.
The one constant is the person is insane. Somewhat constant are warning signs, as well as antipsychotic medications involved. If a medicine can give a person cancer and other horrible side effects, such as death, they can help make a person go insane.

 

There are two constants, and you know it.

 

Yes; said Democrats and Republicans enable corporations.

Beto says the shooting is Trumps and Fox News fault.

 

Agreed, I will not put to much analysis into Betos motivation to blame Trump and Fox News.

 

I won't go as far as Beto to assign cause to those two, but they are ratcheting up the intensity. It is dangerous to use terminology like an "invasion", "infestation", "enemy of the people" and the sort to create fear. When fear is present, there is a danger for irrational and reactionary behavior.

So, no, it wasn't like these dudes were walking around calmly in their neighborhoods, heard Trump's talk about immigrants, promoted by Fox News, and decided they need to shoot up a place with a bunch of perceived undesirable people. The level of talk, though, needs to be tempered down quite a bit and it should have been done so a long time ago. It was never funny, or it shouldn't have been.

That said, it's still the shooter's fault and his alone for him walking into a Wal-Mart and spraying bullets everywhere. He did it and he's responsible. [uck fay] that guy.

 

I mean on one hand you can’t directly blame anyone other than this asshole.

On the other hand, it’s worth reflecting g on the rhetoric. When I complain about the words Trump uses it isn’t because it hurts my ears. The rhetoric is dangerous because there are disturbed people out there who do not need to feel validated in their skewed perceptions.

 

For a guy paranoid about immigrants, isn't the language of the Democrats also of concern; open borders, nobody is illegal, let them in, decriminalize illegal entry, abolish ICE, etc,

 

... No?

Link me to the open border talking point. I keep hearing about it from conservatives, it must be a party platform I am unaware of.

 

I would say that’s more policies than language specifically.

And as for policies I’m against most of those. In fact most of the candidates are (note decriminalizing - as in felony - illegal immigration isn’t nobody is illegal and allows greater flexibility for dealing with illegal immigrants). Heck I’m even on the record saying someone else who can explain the reasons without creating evil straw men can go build a wall if that’s what it actually takes.

But getting back to those policies - if I understand correctly, pro-immigration stances are dangerous because of what it will cause xenophobes to do?

 

Where the language of Democrats is of concern is the demonizing of individual politicians, the blanket ‘x’ hates ‘y’, etc.

My wife and I were in this debate this morning with her arguing ‘but isn’t it important to speak out against hate / racism / etc.’

And the answer is of course yes. But first everyone needs to make sure what they are speaking out against is specifically that (hate, etc) and not just another reason to tail against someone or an idea they don’t like. And second, it’s important to be specific with such comments - blanket statements really just fuel division as good people get caught up with a wide broom.

Each of us is at some level most likely guilty of this. And it will just continue to fuel division.

 

Ouch.

 

Read the talking points of Democrats. Especially new now running for President. I compiled my list from their talking points. It is a simple Google search.

Ocasio-Cortez wants to abolish ICE

 

AbOlIsHiNg iCe DoEsNt MeAn OpEn BoRdErS

 

so you can't. Their talk points do not include open borders.

 

It doesn't. ICE is younger than you are, yet borders and regulated immigration are not.

 

No one asked, but I also think the idea of abolishing ICE is ridiculous.

Clean it up if you need to, but abolish?

Am I missing something there? What’s the significance of abolishing it to our another agency in charge of enforcement?