I’m really disappointed by this news from Hawaii and Zuckerberg. He’s going around donating money to EPA schools, but now suing Hawaians for their land. The Hawaian natives have suffered a lot since being annexed (against their will), and I would have expected better from him.
Also, I think it’s ironic how the focus here seems to be always on how immigrants are being hurt. Why no focus on the Natives? They are hurt as much or more–because their only home is here, and it gradually being taken away. They have no other country to return to with a pot of gold earned in the US.
It just goes to show that nothing in life is black and white. Just because someone does philanthropy doesn’t mean everything they do is coated with noble intentions nor do those other actions take anything away from their truly philanthropic actions.
I have the same wish to hear some data, namely, from our current incumbent. When has Trump ever exhibited the slightest trace of logic or reasoning in his comments/tweets? And yet every time he mouths off his senseless words, we are expending time and energy endlessly debating their meanings and effects. This is not a POTUS leading the country. It’s more like watching a train wreck waiting to happen.
The point is not whether people around the world have any idea about how Americans truly feel, but that Americans are being represented by somebody who can’t help projecting the image of our country as a bully with no regard for others. How does dismissing diplomacy without any strategy have any positive outcome?
Yes, we are. The disgrace and embarrassment I feel is partly a result of losing face (big time). If you don’t feel it now, step out of the US and you will.
This accusation comes from an anonymous source and is only an allegation. (Not that I would be surprised that Trump used that term.) Not political at all.
It was alleged to have occured in a private, closed door meeting. (I’m sure none of us has used rough language in private meetings before.)
The term was directed at countries and not at any people or persons. (Too many here have extropolated the comment to have been directed at a population in general.)
And frankly, having just returned from a trip that included stops in some pretty sketchy parts of Columbia, Costa Rico and Panama, I’ve used similar, deragotry terms to describe the squalor I saw there.
We should always put the US first. If that makes is selfish or greedy, so be it.
I’d rather be a bully than weak so countries walk all over us. People always think diplomacy will work. It’s what Europe tried with Hitler. We all know how well diplomacy worked. Diplomacy assumes everyone is sane, and there’s no evil. Those are bad assumptions.
Yes, and using diplomacy cost millions and millions to lose their life. Far fewer would have died had force been used much sooner. Diplomacy was never going to work. If we learn from history, then we’d use force much sooner.
WWII was a war fought between military alliances. Without establishing foreign relations, well-coordinated strategies and efforts would not have been possible. It would be a mistake to conclude that using force much sooner (independently, without relations, planning or strategy) is the answer to conflicts. If Trump’s behavior is any indication of his ability to work with other countries in war, leaders are shaking their heads in silence.
Um… we need “quality immigrants” to the US. These immigrants can be from Norway, Haiti, or Africa. Anywhere in the world is fine as long as they are of quality. Trump should have said this instead of what he had said. This can serve his intention without being labeled as “racist” because quality immigrants are more likely from developed countries than developing ones.
Alliances form pretty fast when a guy is attacking everyone around him. The US was already allies with UK and France. Russia joining was pretty natural, since they were the other front. The old saying is the enemy of my enemy is my friend. It would have been much easier to stop him before he took all of France which made a beach assault a necessity. Over 200,000 allied troops died in that battle.
To assume that “quality” immigrants comes mostly from developed and non-poor countries represents affirmation bias.
If you think about it, immigrants from poor and failing countries often times are incented to work harder and longer - just look at how Chinese immigrants (when China was poor and failing) or Irish immigrants (when Ireland was poor and failing)?worked when they came here.
The problem is that the US isnt able to frame the probelm it is trying to solve for with immigration reform other than “less volume and more regulated flow!)
We need a blend of highly educated and motivated wealthy immigrants (which is what I would guess Trump refers to w his Norweigian comments) as well as highly motivated or educated but poorer immigrants (hypothetically this combo would incent the immigrants tonwork harder).
What we do not need are non motivated immigrants, whether they are wealthy or poor.
If you subscribe to the gospel of wealth, which Trump does, uou start to belive that wealth and cleverness/motivation are equiavelnt. As well, you start to believe that if you are poor, it is because you are not motivated. So, if you believe that, then you look at a poor country and generalize the citizens of thise countries all as being unmotivated… and replace the adjective “poor” with “shithole.”
This is incorrect. Motivated and Eager individuals can come from countries both rich and poor. All the same, I have seen super hard workers from Mexico, China, and the UK, and i have also seen incredibly lazy people come here from China, the UK, and Mexico.
Even though China and Ireland were poor, both countries have an intelligent population with strong work ethics. We need to encourage immigrants who are smart and/or have good work ethics to come to America, regardless of their country of origin.
Also, I have not forgotten your bias against Chinatown dwellers and Israel. Those memories will carry weight in your analysis of anything political in a negative light until you rectify those biases.
I am pro immigration. I am married a Russian who thinks her country is a shithole compared to the US. That’s why she left and never will return. Immigrants come here to escape and better their life. I don’t care what Trump said. I I find him personally disgusting… But he has a method to his madness
The best part about Trump is how he rattles and unhinges the knee jerk left. Their era of political correctness and moral superiority is being challenged.
The left always calls it’s opposition racist. And yet Trumps immigration policy is more liberal than Clinton or Feinstein advocated in the 90s
Trump is a direct, mortal threat to both the power structure and the ideology of the left. The left knows it and is responding just as the British left wing responded to Thatcher.
The young liberal fascists breaking windows and intimidating Trump supporters on Inauguration Day displayed the kind of hostility that Thatcher evoked on the left.
The congressional Democrats’ decision to adopt pure negativity and opposition tactics is much more like the Labour Party’s reaction to Thatcher than then-House Speaker Tip O’Neill’s much more nuanced approach to Reagan. One-third of the House Democrats voted for the Reagan economic program in the summer of 1981. It is hard to imagine that happening in the House today.
