Will somebody please tell me how this "we rule" list has helped the planet? Or how did the enslaved blacks or the displaced and small pox (etc.) genocide of Native Americans see all this greatness? What about endless war?
I'm not saying there aren't some great things about this land, but all this rah rah needs a little perspective. Some of you make it sound like we are all so righteous and the rest of this world is crap. Break down the borders of your mind because it's all one planet.
The question, or 'challenge' as it were, was what are 100 things that made the USA a beacon for freedom and opportunity for immigrants. You will have to forgive me for excluding slavery, the Dred Scott decision, the Pinkerton strike breakers, Johnstown Flood and Ted Bundy from the list.
Yet I would argue that any nation engaging in Endless War (™) and has a history of genocide and slavery with in its own borders is not a beacon for freedom.
Your comparison must be A Marxist Utopia because something drove tens of millions of people here over the last 200 years. Maybe the Soviets had it right?
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,840
Ah oh, here we go with the commie pinko accusations again.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
^ I didn't call you a pinko communist, I just don't understand what your hang up is. There's something about this country that caused 30MM people to come to America during the Age of Migration alone. Yet you can't find it in your heart to say anything positive about the US and criticize those of us that do. So maybe you think our polar opposite had it right since we must have so totally wrong.
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,840
^ I didn't call you a pinko communist, I just don't understand what your hang up is. There's something about this country that caused 30MM people to come to America during the Age of Migration alone. Yet you can't find it in your heart to say anything positive about the US and criticize those of us that do. So maybe you think our polar opposite had it right since we must have so totally wrong.
No hang ups, just a realistic viewpoint on the subject.
I can and have said all kinds of positive things about the land that our artificial, invisible and for the most part unnatural borders enclose and I can and have said all kinds of positives things about the people who live within those magic lines.
As for people coming to this country well, people are animals who migrate to where the resources are most abundant. Unlike other animals, however, who live within the confines of the basic laws of ecology, humans move into area of more abundant resources and devour them and then move on. That's all it's about, pure and simple.
Free you mind from artificial barriers. This is one planet, not many countries.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
So this is the concept of the nation state. Well you're about 700 years too late in western culture and it goes back even further for eastern and ancient civilizations.
But yes of course resources are key and drive migration. No argument. I believe it was 17 on my list.
Post edited by mrussel1 on
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,840
So this is the concept of the nation state. Well you're about 700 years too late in western culture and it goes back even further for eastern and ancient civilizations.
But yes of course resources are key and drive migration. No argument. I believe it was 17 on my list.
700 years late or just a bit ahead of my time?
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
So this is the concept of the nation state. Well you're about 700 years too late in western culture and it goes back even further for eastern and ancient civilizations.
But yes of course resources are key and drive migration. No argument. I believe it was 17 on my list.
700 years late or just a bit ahead of my time?
The world is more connected than ever. I doubt that we'll eliminate the nation state in the next thousand years but who knows. It's certainly diminished.
Interesting http://www.vox.com/2016/4/21/11477612/donald-trump-transgender-bathrooms-lgbtq Donald Trump was asked about anti-transgender bathroom bills. His answer was … correct.Asked whether he would let Caitlyn Jenner, a trans woman, use the bathroom of her choice at Trump Tower, he said he would. He added, "There's a big move to create new bathrooms. Problem with that is … first of all, I think that would be discriminatory in a certain way. It would be unbelievably expensive for businesses and for the country. Leave it the way it is."
^ I didn't call you a pinko communist, I just don't understand what your hang up is. There's something about this country that caused 30MM people to come to America during the Age of Migration alone. Yet you can't find it in your heart to say anything positive about the US and criticize those of us that do. So maybe you think our polar opposite had it right since we must have so totally wrong.
Perception isn't always a reflection of reality. If you know a bit about the migration eras, you know that much of it was fueled by propaganda disseminated abroad by capitalists looking for cheap labor. Millions of the people who migrated here did so to living and working conditions far worse than the place they spent their life savings to leave.
On another note, most of the 20 points you made were freedoms, protections, and opportunities that were completely closed off to large (a majority if you go back just a few generations) portions of the nation's population.
This is on topic because Drumpf wants to "Make America Great Again" We therefore need to determine the level of greatness and place it in his context, which of course he hasn't communicated yet.
^ I didn't call you a pinko communist, I just don't understand what your hang up is. There's something about this country that caused 30MM people to come to America during the Age of Migration alone. Yet you can't find it in your heart to say anything positive about the US and criticize those of us that do. So maybe you think our polar opposite had it right since we must have so totally wrong.
Perception isn't always a reflection of reality. If you know a bit about the migration eras, you know that much of it was fueled by propaganda disseminated abroad by capitalists looking for cheap labor. Millions of the people who migrated here did so to living and working conditions far worse than the place they spent their life savings to leave.
On another note, most of the 20 points you made were freedoms, protections, and opportunities that were completely closed off to large (a majority if you go back just a few generations) portions of the nation's population.
This is on topic because Drumpf wants to "Make America Great Again" We therefore need to determine the level of greatness and place it in his context, which of course he hasn't communicated yet.
I'll counter your argument with a few points:
1. When a politician disseminates misleading information, it's propaganda. When a capitalist or business does, it's advertising. And what drove them here was the dearth of opportunities at home, compared to what was available in the US.
2. On the protections, yes you're correct. They were originally closed off to a large population but that changed because we changed. First, opened to non-land owners. And then to non-whites, then to women and then finally the death of Jim Crow. These are some of the great successes of the progressive movement, whatever title it was operating under at the particular time.
3. Look at the major immigrant communities from the first two waves. The Italians, Poles, Ukes, Irish, Greeks, etc. Their first generation here was difficult. They were discriminated against by Nativists (remember NINA...no Irish/Italian need apply). But their children learn the language, assimilated and have become as American as anyone else. Now our 'ethnic' neighborhoods are some of the most interesting places in our big cities. My point is that whether they were lured here by capitalist advertising or not, by and large it's difficult to argue that the immigration hasn't worked out for both the USA and the immigrants themselves.
This is why, while Trump's rhetoric alarms me, it's no different than the Know-Nothing party of the 1850's. Every time we've had a great immigration wave, we've had a corresponding Nativist movement. That's what we are seeing now, except it's taken over a party rather than being a third party.
Sounds pretty straightforward and there has not been much backlash on 4 of his 5 points. In fact it sounds like America is on board.
How does he plan to deport the illegals that are NOT in the detention centers? Is that off the table? If so, where's the pathway to citizenship.
Glad you are speaking for America. Pretty impressive.
I am not speaking for America - was that a sleight?
From what I see a lot of americans refuse to admit that Donald is kicking ass and taking names. New York handed him a silver platter of delegates. Hard pill to swallow? New York of all places.
Sounds pretty straightforward and there has not been much backlash on 4 of his 5 points. In fact it sounds like America is on board.
How does he plan to deport the illegals that are NOT in the detention centers? Is that off the table? If so, where's the pathway to citizenship.
Glad you are speaking for America. Pretty impressive.
I am not speaking for America - was that a sleight?
From what I see a lot of americans refuse to admit that Donald is kicking ass and taking names. New York handed him a silver platter of delegates. Hard pill to swallow? New York of all places.
In fact it sounds like America is on board.
This quote led to my comment. I'm not sure what it means then.
However, if you use NY as an example, that's sort of tenuous. Trump - 524k votes Bernie - 763k votes Hillary - 1.05MM votes
He came in third in his own state. Yes, it's a democratic stranglehold of course, but it doesn't exactly speak well of his chance to win the state in the general.
^^^ America being on board as in keeping Trump in this race. For such a "fool" he is still around. What will it take to rid America of Trump? When I say victory I am talking about in his own party. NY handed him a victory.
Hard to argue this. http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/article73424742.html Evans dropped a bomb on MSNBC’s Morning Joe recently, saying that the conventional wisdom about a disputed Republican convention is dead wrong. He says 1,100 is the new 1,237. In other words, Donald Trump only would need to get to that lower number of delegates to clinch the nomination. That’s because once he reaches that threshold — and he’s almost certain to do so — there will be a stampede by unbound delegates to give him the remaining support he needs before the convention is gaveled to order in July
^^^ America being on board as in keeping Trump in this race. For such a "fool" he is still around. What will it take to rid America of Trump? When I say victory I am talking about in his own party. NY handed him a victory.
I know what you're saying about NY. I'm saying it's meaningless in the general. NY is still solidly blue. The election will be contested in a handful of states. The question is whether he can compete in VA, CO, NM, OH, and FL.
^^^ America being on board as in keeping Trump in this race. For such a "fool" he is still around. What will it take to rid America of Trump? When I say victory I am talking about in his own party. NY handed him a victory.
I know what you're saying about NY. I'm saying it's meaningless in the general. NY is still solidly blue. The election will be contested in a handful of states. The question is whether he can compete in VA, CO, NM, OH, and FL.
Hard to argue this. http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/article73424742.html Evans dropped a bomb on MSNBC’s Morning Joe recently, saying that the conventional wisdom about a disputed Republican convention is dead wrong. He says 1,100 is the new 1,237. In other words, Donald Trump only would need to get to that lower number of delegates to clinch the nomination. That’s because once he reaches that threshold — and he’s almost certain to do so — there will be a stampede by unbound delegates to give him the remaining support he needs before the convention is gaveled to order in July
Hard to argue this. http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/article73424742.html Evans dropped a bomb on MSNBC’s Morning Joe recently, saying that the conventional wisdom about a disputed Republican convention is dead wrong. He says 1,100 is the new 1,237. In other words, Donald Trump only would need to get to that lower number of delegates to clinch the nomination. That’s because once he reaches that threshold — and he’s almost certain to do so — there will be a stampede by unbound delegates to give him the remaining support he needs before the convention is gaveled to order in July
That actually flies against conventional wisdom.
No one ever said Trump is full of conventional wisdom. You don’t have to be a geek with computer models and numbers to see that Evans’ theory makes sense: Delegates are human, and humans behave in predictable ways. They want to get something for their support and a delegate is a depreciating asset who gets less and less for his commitment the less it is needed. No one wants to be the last on board.
Evans said that in the non-smoke-filled rooms where the big decisions are made there’s an acknowledgement that Trump is likely to hit the “real number” he needs to wrap it up earlier than he would have gotten to 1,237. So why embark on a change to the rules that might bring about the “rough July” Trump is predicting?
This is pretty good http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trump-odds-campaign-chiefs-comments/story?id=38637905 "Wouldn’t it be interesting if I changed and everyone said, 'This is the most presidential candidate since Abraham Lincoln,' and then we started to lose. Wouldn’t that be terrible?" Trump asked on Sunday. "So we gotta be a little bit careful about changing, folks."
This is pretty good http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trump-odds-campaign-chiefs-comments/story?id=38637905 "Wouldn’t it be interesting if I changed and everyone said, 'This is the most presidential candidate since Abraham Lincoln,' and then we started to lose. Wouldn’t that be terrible?" Trump asked on Sunday. "So we gotta be a little bit careful about changing, folks."
It's as if he thinks the nomination is the final prize. Yeah, keep on the same track Donald.
Ted Cruz, John Kasich join forces to stop Donald Trump
Ted Cruz and John Kasich issued startling statements Sunday night about their paths ahead, the first sign the two campaigns are coordinating to deny Donald Trump the Republican presidential nomination.
Ted Cruz, John Kasich join forces to stop Donald Trump
Ted Cruz and John Kasich issued startling statements Sunday night about their paths ahead, the first sign the two campaigns are coordinating to deny Donald Trump the Republican presidential nomination.
Comments
I can and have said all kinds of positive things about the land that our artificial, invisible and for the most part unnatural borders enclose and I can and have said all kinds of positives things about the people who live within those magic lines.
As for people coming to this country well, people are animals who migrate to where the resources are most abundant. Unlike other animals, however, who live within the confines of the basic laws of ecology, humans move into area of more abundant resources and devour them and then move on. That's all it's about, pure and simple.
Free you mind from artificial barriers. This is one planet, not many countries.
But yes of course resources are key and drive migration. No argument. I believe it was 17 on my list.
SHOW COUNT: (149) 1990's=3, 2000's=53, 2010/20's=89, US=109, CAN=15, Europe=19 ,New Zealand=2, Australia=2
Mexico=1, Colombia=1
Upcoming: Sacramento, Vegas x2, Manchester, London, Chicago x2, NYC x2, Fenway x2, Ohana x2 Aucklandx2, Gold Coast, Melbournex2
http://www.vox.com/2016/4/21/11477612/donald-trump-transgender-bathrooms-lgbtq
Donald Trump was asked about anti-transgender bathroom bills. His answer was … correct.Asked whether he would let Caitlyn Jenner, a trans woman, use the bathroom of her choice at Trump Tower, he said he would. He added, "There's a big move to create new bathrooms. Problem with that is … first of all, I think that would be discriminatory in a certain way. It would be unbelievably expensive for businesses and for the country. Leave it the way it is."
If you know a bit about the migration eras, you know that much of it was fueled by propaganda disseminated abroad by capitalists looking for cheap labor. Millions of the people who migrated here did so to living and working conditions far worse than the place they spent their life savings to leave.
On another note, most of the 20 points you made were freedoms, protections, and opportunities that were completely closed off to large (a majority if you go back just a few generations) portions of the nation's population.
This is on topic because Drumpf wants to "Make America Great Again"
We therefore need to determine the level of greatness and place it in his context, which of course he hasn't communicated yet.
1. When a politician disseminates misleading information, it's propaganda. When a capitalist or business does, it's advertising. And what drove them here was the dearth of opportunities at home, compared to what was available in the US.
2. On the protections, yes you're correct. They were originally closed off to a large population but that changed because we changed. First, opened to non-land owners. And then to non-whites, then to women and then finally the death of Jim Crow. These are some of the great successes of the progressive movement, whatever title it was operating under at the particular time.
3. Look at the major immigrant communities from the first two waves. The Italians, Poles, Ukes, Irish, Greeks, etc. Their first generation here was difficult. They were discriminated against by Nativists (remember NINA...no Irish/Italian need apply). But their children learn the language, assimilated and have become as American as anyone else. Now our 'ethnic' neighborhoods are some of the most interesting places in our big cities. My point is that whether they were lured here by capitalist advertising or not, by and large it's difficult to argue that the immigration hasn't worked out for both the USA and the immigrants themselves.
This is why, while Trump's rhetoric alarms me, it's no different than the Know-Nothing party of the 1850's. Every time we've had a great immigration wave, we've had a corresponding Nativist movement. That's what we are seeing now, except it's taken over a party rather than being a third party.
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/boom-donald-trump-announces-5-point-plan-about-illegal-immigration/
Sounds pretty straightforward and there has not been much backlash on 4 of his 5 points.
In fact it sounds like America is on board.
Glad you are speaking for America. Pretty impressive.
From what I see a lot of americans refuse to admit that Donald is kicking ass and taking names.
New York handed him a silver platter of delegates.
Hard pill to swallow? New York of all places.
This quote led to my comment. I'm not sure what it means then.
However, if you use NY as an example, that's sort of tenuous.
Trump - 524k votes
Bernie - 763k votes
Hillary - 1.05MM votes
He came in third in his own state. Yes, it's a democratic stranglehold of course, but it doesn't exactly speak well of his chance to win the state in the general.
America being on board as in keeping Trump in this race.
For such a "fool" he is still around.
What will it take to rid America of Trump?
When I say victory I am talking about in his own party.
NY handed him a victory.
Evans dropped a bomb on MSNBC’s Morning Joe recently, saying that the conventional wisdom about a disputed Republican convention is dead wrong. He says 1,100 is the new 1,237. In other words, Donald Trump only would need to get to that lower number of delegates to clinch the nomination. That’s because once he reaches that threshold — and he’s almost certain to do so — there will be a stampede by unbound delegates to give him the remaining support he needs before the convention is gaveled to order in July
With less than 48 hours before voting began across five Northeastern states, GOP front-runner Donald Trump looked ahead to Tuesday’s contests in five states where he’s poised to do well
You don’t have to be a geek with computer models and numbers to see that Evans’ theory makes sense: Delegates are human, and humans behave in predictable ways. They want to get something for their support and a delegate is a depreciating asset who gets less and less for his commitment the less it is needed. No one wants to be the last on board.
Evans said that in the non-smoke-filled rooms where the big decisions are made there’s an acknowledgement that Trump is likely to hit the “real number” he needs to wrap it up earlier than he would have gotten to 1,237. So why embark on a change to the rules that might bring about the “rough July” Trump is predicting?
"Wouldn’t it be interesting if I changed and everyone said, 'This is the most presidential candidate since Abraham Lincoln,' and then we started to lose. Wouldn’t that be terrible?" Trump asked on Sunday. "So we gotta be a little bit careful about changing, folks."
No clowns in '16.
Ted Cruz and John Kasich issued startling statements Sunday night about their paths ahead, the first sign the two campaigns are coordinating to deny Donald Trump the Republican presidential nomination.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/24/politics/ted-cruz-john-kasich-join-forces-to-stop-donald-trump/index.html?adkey=bn
I swear (
Trump loves this.