J28

Are Walls Immoral?

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

I don't think that the bolded portion is accurate.  Perhaps you've got a cite to support that assertion? 

Here’s a story from last year (Jan). 

“Wall” was merely an extension and has not been built. Reports are that no plans have been offered to dems re where “wall” will be built.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2019/01/16/these-texas-brothers-could-make-millions-building-the-first-new-section-of-trumps-border-wall/#4f28ad0d7009

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

What you describe largely agrees with what I think we should do, and if anyone's interested, they can go search my prior posts.  In summary, we need to refine immigration quotas to reflect the nation's ability to employ and house those who wish to come here.  We need a guest worker program that permits legal entry/employment/travel to/from home nations.  We need to afford MOST rights/requirements to non-citizen residents, with the exception of the right to vote. 

To implement this?  We need to create a system that will permit self-reporting/legal work status application, with the stipulation that no deportation activity ( aside from that for cause, ie an illegal immigrant being caught and charged w/a high misdemeanor/felony) would occur until adjudication of the individual's application.  Adjudication would be done much like it is now for military enlistees - a simple national agency check.  If the person demonstrates the means of self sufficiency, no criminal record,  then their approval would be automatic.  Exceptions would be manually adjudicated.  This would also require that anyone found to be non-compliant would be subject to deportation for cause, as would any guest worker subsequently found guilty of a major misdemeanor/felony.   Non-citizen immigrants wouldn't be eligible for monetary social assistance for some period of time ( 1 yr/2 yrs?)  after their residency permits had been granted.  Non-citizen immigrants  would NOT be permitted to shortcut the application for citizenship.   Non-citizen immigrants would not be eligible for social security/medicare, nor would they be subject to FICA withholdings.   I'd also suggest adjustment of the "anchor baby" statute - such that a baby born here would qualify for citizenship only if one of their parents was a citizen.  

Lot of implementation details to work out - but generally, anyone who's made a home for themselves, who's contributed to their community, hasn't engaged in criminal behavior, voluntarily complied with the reporting/application would be provided the ability to live here much like our natural born residents.   

As I read your post, the main difference is path to citizenship.   Because of our shared values of all men being equal, and equal opportunity, I fear any system that could create an underclass.  I’m dating a green card holder.   She came from a “good” nation where not many want to move to the US.   She came over with a serviceman, making it even easier.   She no longer desires citizenship, but still finds living in America as a woman better then going home, plus she has kids that are citizens.   Citizenship by birth should not change.  We don’t need a second class of fourth generation resident aliens.   Our current politics explains why we need a path to citizenship.    It is permanent.  

Hotheads might tear apart families or force people from their homes.    They are now.   I posted last tear of a Polish physician of good medical reputation who was forced to call his wife and say goodby,   We arrested him at the hospital and deported him because he had a collection of traffic violations.   We should have revoked his drivers license, not his marriage (unless his wife learned Polish and left her country to stay with her man).    You cannot expect people to live here for decades, contribute to America, build businesses in America, wed Americans, even have American children, knowing that a future politician may send them back to a country they no longer know.   As we prove ourself to be unreliable, it is even more important we offer the world’s best and brightest, the world’s achievers and doers, security that making a life here will be worthwhile.   I want those people here, to dilute out the trailer trash, racists, slackers and free riders that we are stuck with.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lark said:

As I read your post, the main difference is path to citizenship.   Because of our shared values of all men being equal, and equal opportunity, I fear any system that could create an underclass.  I’m dating a green card holder.   She came from a “good” nation where not many want to move to the US.   She came over with a serviceman, making it even easier.   She no longer desires citizenship, but still finds living in America as a woman better then going home, plus she has kids that are citizens.   Citizenship by birth should not change.    Our current politics explains why we need a path to citizenship.    It is permanent.  

Hotheads might tear apart families or force people from their homes.    They are now.   I posted last tear of a Polish physician of good medical reputation who was forced to call his wife and say goodby,   We arrested him at the hospital and deported him because he had a collection of traffic violations.   We should have revoked his drivers license, not his marriage (unless his wife learned Polish and left her country to stay with her man).    You cannot expect people to live here for decades, contribute to America, build businesses in America, wed Americans, even have American children, knowing that a future politician may send them back to a country they no longer know.   As we prove ourself to be unreliable, it is even more important we offer the world’s best and brightest, the world’s achievers and doers, security that making a life here will be worthwhile.   I want those people here, to dilute out the trailer trash, racists, slackers and free riders that we are stuck with.  

I think you misunderstand my intent - I don't intend to prevent non-citizen immigrants from applying for citizenship, I just don't think that having gotten away with being here illegally for a long time should permit them to shortcut the process, nor do I think that anyone who doesn't desire to become a citizen should be required to to stay and work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Fakenews said:

Here’s a story from last year (Jan). 

“Wall” was merely an extension and has not been built. Reports are that no plans have been offered to dems re where “wall” will be built.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2019/01/16/these-texas-brothers-could-make-millions-building-the-first-new-section-of-trumps-border-wall/#4f28ad0d7009

That doesn't really say much about what USC&BP have expressed, and that is the source of my disagreement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walls, like any human endeavor can be used for moral or immoral purposes. The OP should be more specific and precise in his question.

Just like a J/28 by itself is neither moral nor immoral. It may be a piece of shit, but that's another subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

I think you misunderstand my intent - I don't intend to prevent non-citizen immigrants from applying for citizenship, I just don't think that having gotten away with being here illegally for a long time should permit them to shortcut the process, nor do I think that anyone who doesn't desire to become a citizen should be required to to stay and work. 

Ok.    With the exception of dreamers, I am in agreement.   I would go further.   Deny legal residency to those that come over or stay illegally (air or tunnel) as adults or after the Chesapeake / Lark immigration act is passed.   A kid that was brought over under Bush at age three, doesn’t speak Spanish, and was told by her parents she was American should not be deported because our system has been broken for a generation,   She is more American then Mexican.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Lark said:

Ok.    With the exception of dreamers, I am in agreement.   I would go further.   Deny legal residency to those that come over or stay illegally (air or tunnel) as adults or after the Chessepeak / Lark immigration act is passed.   A kid that was brought over under Bush at age three, doesn’t speak Spanish, and was told by her parents she was American should not be deported because our system has been broken for a generation,   She is more American then Mexican.   

I agree - the kids aren't responsible for the actions of their parents.  

Edited to add:  And it's this position that really aggravates me w/r/t the partisan BS that's squashed every real attempt to address the issue.  I actually agree w/Trump's comment that Pres Obama's executive decree was wrong, and that to fix this requires legislation.  There was an attempt by a Junior R congressman last year to introduce a bill - and both sides did things to prevent it from coming to the floor for debate.  Pelosi had a chance to actually get good leverage to address the issue and blew it because she wants to deny Trump anything that looks like a victory on the wall.  
Seems to me that making something good happen ought to be a win for everyone - and that that win ought to be a higher priority than a partisan denial. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A wall is an inanimate object and in itself cannot be either moral, amoral or immoral.  All we are talking about is the context of this particular wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope Pelosi goes down for this too. She had a chance to be the adult in the room and is too partisan to stand up for we the people. Old fuckin hag is just as awful as McTurtle and Rump. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

I hope Pelosi goes down for this too. She had a chance to be the adult in the room and is too partisan to stand up for we the people. Old fuckin hag is just as awful as McTurtle and Rump. 

How could she be the adult? She and Schumer wanted a private meeting, Trump insisted it be televised and embarrassed himself by stating he would be proud to shut down the government.  You can't reason with someone so unreasonable - Trump feels he has to win on this one (pretty much verifying that Hannity, Coulter and Limbaugh are running the government). Coulter has stated if Trump doesn't get his wall he is finished.  He is finished in any case, this just proves he has no clothes quicker.

So - it's throw away some billions of dollars or hold his little nuts to the fire. Once the GOP Senate realizes this is going to cost them they can pass bills to fund the government and if Trump vetoes the House will override it. It's that simple.  McConnell is as guilty as Trump.  Funding is controlled by Congress, not the POTUS.

You don't negotiate with a dictator or an immature bullshitter who has always been able to bully and bluff to get what he wants.  I think Pelosi should make a statement to the American people laying out exactly what is happening and what is needed to end it. Congress critters are notorious for being bought and paid for but they also know he controls their time at the public trough - the voters. 

edit: Meanwhile I now understand what all those Trump Build The Wall ads are for - For $20.20 you can buy a brick with some bullshit stats about crime by brown people that will be sent to the Ds in Congress.  So - forget Trumpy Bears and Presidential Coins - buy those bricks folks! Trump is counting on you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

Big announcement today. Hope springs eternal.

My hope.....Wall for Dreamers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"President Donald Trump offered a proposal to extend protections for so-called Dreamers for three years in exchange for his demanded $5.7 billion toward a border wall as a way to reopen the federal government after almost a month.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has pledged to bring a bill to the Senate this week, Trump said in a 13-minute televised address from the White House in which he emphasized that parts of his plan had been supported by Democrats in the past.

Top Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, rejected the plan earlier on Saturday, and some conservative voices chimed in to attack Trump’s offer of relief for so-called “Dreamers” -- young people bought to the country illegally as children -- in exchange for funding for border security".

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-19/trump-promises-announcement-on-border-as-talks-remain-stalled

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 8 congressmen who represent the Texas border with Mexico - one is a Republican. They all oppose Trumps wall.

The end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, d'ranger said:

There are 8 congressmen who represent the Texas border with Mexico - one is a Republican. They all oppose Trumps wall.

The end.

Well I guess that settles it then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dog said:

Well I guess that settles it then.

Yep, if the people who live there don't want it then just maybe it's not needed or wanted. Or do you support big government ramming shit down our throats? Take you time before answering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

Well I guess that settles it then.

Great! Now maybe you’ll stop doggy styling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

Yep, if the people who live there don't want it then just maybe it's not needed or wanted. Or do you support big government ramming shit down our throats? Take you time before answering.

Good point...if you assume that only the people who live along the border in Texas are effected by illegal immigration, drug and human trafficking ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

Good point...if you assume that only the people who live along the border in Texas are effected by illegal immigration, drug and human trafficking ...

Yep, and since they aren't affected then any needed efforts should be directed elsewhere.  Can I get you anything else today?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

Yep, and since they aren't affected then any needed efforts should be directed elsewhere.  Can I get you anything else today?

Nonsense...of course they're effected, everyone is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

Nonsense...of course they're effected, everyone is.

Oh, so you know better than the people who actually live there.  I will add you to the group known as Trump Knows Best.  It's a good thing you didn't choose to be a lawyer, you are not very good at this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

Oh, so you know better than the people who actually live there.  I will add you to the group known as Trump Knows Best.  It's a good thing you didn't choose to be a lawyer, you are not very good at this.

I know they are effected by a leaky southern border. I know illegal immigration drives down wages for Americans. I know we are running around 70,000 OD deaths per year and rising. I know Texans are not the only ones effected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dog said:

I know they are effected by a leaky southern border. I know illegal immigration drives down wages for Americans. I know we are running around 70,000 OD deaths per year and rising. I know Texans are not the only ones effected.

You sure know a lot of things - lets start with your ODs - care to break that down? And specifically drugs coming across the border where there is no physical wall? Take your time on that one because you can't. It's a bullshit lie repeated endlessly to scare folks like you.

Your biggest problem is you know so many things that aren't true. Wake up and smell the covfefe

edit: done with this since you are not capable of looking at facts, I might as well blather with Joker, or maybe the Jehovah's Witnesses will come by.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

You sure know a lot of things - lets start with your ODs - care to break that down? And specifically drugs coming across the border where there is no physical wall? Take your time on that one because you can't. It's a bullshit lie repeated endlessly to scare folks like you.

Your biggest problem is you know so many things that aren't true. Wake up and smell the covfefe

edit: done with this since you are not capable of looking at facts, I might as well blather with Joker, or maybe the Jehovah's Witnesses will come by.

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/public-safety/sd-me-fentanyl-pipeline-20180617-story.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Dog said:

OK, so against my better judgment I read the article, I already know that fentanyl is a serious problem as are prescription opiods. Did you read it? Because it's pretty clear the main problem is China and what is coming in from Mexico isn't anywhere close to Texas.  Trump's stupid wall isn't going to do jack shit regarding the cartels because they are not trekking across the desert on foot.

Sorry but that would be a fail.  And speaking of fail - Trumps big announcement is stating he would approve of a number of needed items but still has the $5.7 billion dollar blank check for his moving target.  Trump, like you is not very good at this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2019 at 9:43 AM, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

I agree - the kids aren't responsible for the actions of their parents.  

Edited to add:  And it's this position that really aggravates me w/r/t the partisan BS that's squashed every real attempt to address the issue.  I actually agree w/Trump's comment that Pres Obama's executive decree was wrong, and that to fix this requires legislation.  There was an attempt by a Junior R congressman last year to introduce a bill - and both sides did things to prevent it from coming to the floor for debate.  Pelosi had a chance to actually get good leverage to address the issue and blew it because she wants to deny Trump anything that looks like a victory on the wall.  
Seems to me that making something good happen ought to be a win for everyone - and that that win ought to be a higher priority than a partisan denial. 

I find it difficult to blame Pelosi for that. Fact is Don Trump proposed to Congress a $1.6 billion funding for a wall in this budget. That budget passed both the House and the Senate and then Don Trump refused to sign his own approved budget. He demanded more than what he asked for after it was approved and so McConnell's throwing up his hands and has pretty much saying "Fuck it" doesn't strike me as unreasonable. 

  IMO Trump deliberately manufactured this to have an OK Corral with the new House. Has nothing to do with a wall...this is what is a street thang".  Nancy knows it and is something of OG herself. She's been in the shit before.

 The corral has been chosen, all that remains is to see who public opinion will leave face down in the road apples.      

 

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coulter, Hannity and Limpbough are setting Trump's policies. They lay em out, he says them and then good sheep repeat them here. See Dog's 70,000 drug deaths for an example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

Coulter, Hannity and Limpbough are setting Trump's policies. They lay em out, he says them and then good sheep repeat them here. See Dog's 70,000 drug deaths for an example.

From Rush's lips to Dog's ear. From Dog's lips to Trump's ass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2019 at 8:46 AM, badlatitude said:

Jeez, Why do we argue on this level at all? If we started putting employers in jail for hiring illegals, the illegals would go home to look for work, and the issue would come to an end and die. In twenty years or less, we will have robots to do menial labor. Why spend billions on a wall when it ends up a tourist attraction blight on the landscape?

FIFY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/17/2019 at 9:00 PM, Laker said:

I notice that no one else has brought this up, but just in the way that Jamaican immigration to Great Britain is a payback for colonialism, the influx of possible immigrants from Central America is, in a lot of ways, merely payback for the US colonial policy at the end of the 1800s.  Panama, for instance, would not exist without US interference.  Honduras certainly was a US colonial product of United Fruit.  Hey, were just getting the forseen result of years of colonialism.  If we made the problem, then we are part of the solution, or so it seems to the poor peasant.

Late night thoughts... but, another angle on the morality question:

All the undocumented central american dishwashers, construction workers, cooks, and treeplanters that I've ever worked alongside  -  none of them were of spanish descent.  

A lot of them, spanish wasn't even their first language. 

Same with the two kids who died in custody, recently. 

They were all Mayan, Incan, or Aztec descent.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, d'ranger said:

OK, so against my better judgment I read the article, I already know that fentanyl is a serious problem as are prescription opiods. Did you read it? Because it's pretty clear the main problem is China and what is coming in from Mexico isn't anywhere close to Texas.  Trump's stupid wall isn't going to do jack shit regarding the cartels because they are not trekking across the desert on foot.

Sorry but that would be a fail.  And speaking of fail - Trumps big announcement is stating he would approve of a number of needed items but still has the $5.7 billion dollar blank check for his moving target.  Trump, like you is not very good at this.

Is it your contention that border walls are never effective or is it that just the sections of border wall currently planned will not be effective?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, d'ranger said:
14 hours ago, Dog said:

OK, so against my better judgment I read the article, I already know that fentanyl is a serious problem as are prescription opiods. Did you read it? Because it's pretty clear the main problem is China and what is coming in from Mexico isn't anywhere close to Texas.  Trump's stupid wall isn't going to do jack shit regarding the cartels because they are not trekking across the desert on foot.

Drug prohibition will continue to be a dangerous failure with or without a wall or parts of one, but prescription opiods are a much, much less serious problem than the fentanyl we've seen since drug warriors cracked down on the prescription kind.
 

Quote

 

...

The records compiled by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicate that heroin or illicit fentanyl was involved in 75 percent of the 47,600 opioid-related deaths that the CDC counted in 2017. Just 30 percent of opioid-related deaths involved prescription analgesics such as hydrocodone and oxycodone, and about two-fifths of those cases also involved heroin or fentanyl.

Adding more substances to the analysis shows that most records listing a prescription pain reliever also list other drugs: For example, 68 percent of deaths involving prescription opioids in 2017 also involved heroin, fentanyl, cocaine, barbiturates, benzodiazepines, or alcohol. In other words, less than 10 percent of opioid-related deaths involved pain medication by itself, and the actual percentage may be considerably lower, since coroners and medical examiners do not always note additional drugs. In New York City, which has one of the country's most thorough systems for reporting drug-related deaths, 97 percent of them involve mixtures.

Keep these facts in mind when you read that your lifetime risk of dying from an opioid overdose is one in 96, according to the latest NSC calculation, compared to a one-in-103 risk of dying in a car crash. That does not really mean you are more likely to die from an opiod overdose, of course, since you can make sure that will not happen by never taking an opioid. But even if you are brave enough to use pain medication that a doctor prescribes for you, the chance that it will kill you is very small: on the order 0.022 percent a year, according to a 2015 study of opioid-related deaths in North Carolina....

 

But pointing out that regulated markets are safer and better doesn't help to stoke the necessary fear to continue our stupid drug war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dogballs Tom said:

Drug prohibition will continue to be a dangerous failure with or without a wall or parts of one, but prescription opiods are a much, much less serious problem than the fentanyl we've seen since drug warriors cracked down on the prescription kind.
 

But pointing out that regulated markets are safer and better doesn't help to stoke the necessary fear to continue our stupid drug war.

That second quote suffers from strawman logic.  Nobody's claiming people overdose on their prescription.  The claim is that once the script ends, they're left with a drug dependency, which leads them to buy whatever-they-can-find on the black market. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the liberal progressive globalist tools of communism have morals....history show not....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, SailBlueH2O said:

Does the liberal progressive globalist tools of communism have morals....history show not....

You really need to get better bait for your trolling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, d'ranger said:
57 minutes ago, SailBlueH2O said:

Does the liberal progressive globalist tools of communism have morals....history show not....

You really need to get better bait for your trolling.

Yeah, he could have worked in gays and blacks somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SailBlueH2O said:

Does the liberal progressive globalist tools of communism have morals....history show not....

Stick to boat stuff.

You just sound like a fool when you stray too far from it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Stick to boat stuff.

You just sound like a fool when you stray too far from it.

It seems I best you in both categories.... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, frenchie said:

Late night thoughts... but, another angle on the morality question:

All the undocumented central american dishwashers, construction workers, cooks, and treeplanters that I've ever worked alongside  -  none of them were of spanish descent.  

A lot of them, spanish wasn't even their first language. 

Same with the two kids who died in custody, recently. 

They were all Mayan, Incan, or Aztec descent.

 

Very true.  I was in Guatemala over the holidays and talked to one of the tour guides.  He was a school teacher with excellent English.  He was the one who raised the events of the little girl who died of dehydration.  The father took her because they were told that people with children would be allowed in while those traveling alone would not.  The mother and other children remained behind.  They paid to join the "convoy".  They were coached not to say they were looking for work even though that was the case.

The Guatemalan education system was set up determined that the Mayans should not lose their heritage.  As a result, all schools must provide education in Spanish (the official language) and 16 of the 23 Mayan dialects spoken in Guatemala.  40% of the population uses Mayan as their primary language and, while Spanish is taught, it is soon forgotten in the small towns where it is not used.

 

From the cite

Caal and her father, Nery Caal, were traveling with a group of 163 migrants who arrived at the New Mexico border earlier this month. After they were taken into custody Dec. 6, the father told a U.S. agent the girl was sick and vomiting.

The father signed a paper stating that Jakelin was in good health, but it is not clear how much he understood of what it said. The form was in English, and agents read it to him in Spanish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, SailBlueH2O said:

It seems I best you in both categories.... 

Well, certainly in the fool department.

I'm pretty good at the boat stuff but I never did anything as cool as helping to build IMP so.....

You may well be right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Well, certainly in the fool department.

I'm pretty good at the boat stuff but I never did anything as cool as helping to build IMP so.....

You may well be right.

Hey you left out I voted for Trump....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, SailBlueH2O said:

Hey you left out I voted for Trump....

 

don't worry, we promise not to forget B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, certainly in the fool department.

No I didn't.

I forgot to mention re: the boat aspect that the closest I got to anything as cool as working on Imp was being complimented by Bruce Kirby on my restoration of my old world championship Kirby 1/4 Tonner Fred Again.

 

Picture 093 (800x600).jpg

deck.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're actually foot braces for when you steer from the rail.

If sitting with your feet in the well it was shallow enough that they were several inches below the back of your knees.

They worked really well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, frenchie said:
10 hours ago, dogballs Tom said:

Drug prohibition will continue to be a dangerous failure with or without a wall or parts of one, but prescription opiods are a much, much less serious problem than the fentanyl we've seen since drug warriors cracked down on the prescription kind.
 

But pointing out that regulated markets are safer and better doesn't help to stoke the necessary fear to continue our stupid drug war.

That second quote suffers from strawman logic.  Nobody's claiming people overdose on their prescription.  The claim is that once the script ends, they're left with a drug dependency, which leads them to buy whatever-they-can-find on the black market. 

I agree, but the answer was, for a time, go to a pill mill. A stupider answer than Portugal's, but it was the answer.

OH NO! Evil drug companies and doctors are profiting from addiction! Crack DOWN! And fuck with people who really do need large doses and drive the pill mill crowd to Chinese fentanyl, demonstrably worse.

There's a thread about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, it's called immigration reform. I missed the parts where Obama called them murderers, rapists and drug dealers.  You got some real morons making this shit up.

Stick to boat stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dogballs Tom said:

I agree, but the answer was, for a time, go to a pill mill. A stupider answer than Portugal's, but it was the answer.

OH NO! Evil drug companies and doctors are profiting from addiction! Crack DOWN! And fuck with people who really do need large doses and drive the pill mill crowd to Chinese fentanyl, demonstrably worse.

There's a thread about this.

That's... a really strong point, actually. 

I think you maybe just pushed me past my last few reservations RE full legalization of all drugs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2019 at 10:45 AM, Laker said:

A wall is an inanimate object and in itself cannot be either moral, amoral or immoral

Nazi gas chambers? Immoral or not?

(OK not saying walls = nazi gas chambers, but some inanimate objects can be immoral!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SailBlueH2O said:

 

Not true - it's also racist when any of his idiot supporters say it or agree with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, frenchie said:
9 hours ago, dogballs Tom said:

There's a thread about this.

That's... a really strong point, actually. 

I think you maybe just pushed me past my last few reservations RE full legalization of all drugs.

With a quick line?

Just think what might have happened if you had read the related thread.

I've made that point pretty endlessly. Mostly to myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dogballs Tom said:

With a quick line?

Just think what might have happened if you had read the related thread.

I've made that point pretty endlessly. Mostly to myself.

No suh! There are many here who depend entirely on you for our thinking and talking points! Even if we don't understand or buy your pov, by the time we've heard and reddit a couple of thousand times we're caught in your web.

You Thomas Ray are not alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Zonker said:
On 1/18/2019 at 1:45 PM, Laker said:

A wall is an inanimate object and in itself cannot be either moral, amoral or immoral

Nazi gas chambers? Immoral or not?

(OK not saying walls = nazi gas chambers, but some inanimate objects can be immoral!)

How about the moral purpose served by keeping them as memorials and as a lesson for future generations?

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Zonker said:

Nazi gas chambers? Immoral or not?

(OK not saying walls = nazi gas chambers, but some inanimate objects can be immoral!)

The argument for an assault rifle being an immoral object could then be made.  I can hear the explosion from such as dogballs Tom over this concept.  Torture instruments from the Medieval period or water boards could be put in the same category.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

How about the moral purpose served by keeping them as memorials and as a lesson for future generations?

-DSK

devil's advocate: if they'd been torn down, Ernst Zundel couldn't have hired Fred Leuchter to create that bullshit "report".

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

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, frenchie said:
11 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

How about the moral purpose served by keeping them as memorials and as a lesson for future generations?

 

devil's advocate: if they'd been torn down, Ernst Zundel couldn't have hired Fred Leuchter to create that bullshit "report".

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

Wow, not being much into Holocaust Denial literature, I had never heard of this. The depths of human nature have never really been fully sounded, have they?

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes they have - Nazism.

They opened the gates of hell in Germany in the 30's & 40's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:
1 hour ago, Steam Flyer said:

Wow, not being much into Holocaust Denial literature, I had never heard of this. The depths of human nature have never really been fully sounded, have they?

 

 

Yes they have - Nazism.

They opened the gates of hell in Germany in the 30's & 40's.

 

Well, they certainly a lot of heinously evil stuff..... stomach turning sadism to totally inhuman.

I'd have grave doubts about anybody who catalogues all (or a workable majority) of the atrocities commited by the Nazis, much less all the others in history: Stalin, Pol Pot, to name just a recent few. Any bets for the future? Not me. I'm just very thankful to not be confronted with such mess, and cling to the hope that I would do my best if it came to that.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/21/2019 at 4:04 AM, dogballs Tom said:
On 1/20/2019 at 10:38 PM, frenchie said:
On 1/20/2019 at 6:44 PM, dogballs Tom said:

There's a thread about this.

That's... a really strong point, actually. 

I think you maybe just pushed me past my last few reservations RE full legalization of all drugs.

With a quick line?

Just think what might have happened if you had read the related thread.

I've made that point pretty endlessly. Mostly to myself.

I think I owe frenchie an apology for this. He's been respectful and that was not.

Sorry, frenchie. Just a little riot. I was feeling unheard.

The thought I posted is hardly new or original. It's what my elk have been saying for several years now. If it's new to you, you might want to consider the boundaries of your information bubble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here ya go, Frenchie. The same argument in more than one sentence, with evidence and everything.

On 3/13/2018 at 6:13 AM, dogballs Tom said:

The War On Pain Pills

Quote

To the extent that the crackdown on prescription analgesics has made them more expensive and harder to get, it has pushed opioid users toward more dangerous drugs. That helps explain why total opioid-related fatalities more than tripled from 2002 to 2016, even as illegal use of pain pills declined.

Puritans were sooo scared that people would get addicted to opioids just by taking some after surgery (which rarely happens) that they inadvertently created the current heroin/fentanyl problem. The solution to this drug war failure will be, of course, more drug war failures!


(Sorry it's Koch-$pon$ored propaganda again.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why hasn't Pelosi traveled to San Diego border crossing and shout "Mr. Trump, tear down this wall!"

If walls are immoral why aren't Democrats demanding the deconstruction of the existing barriers?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Why hasn't Pelosi traveled to San Diego border crossing and shout "Mr. Trump, tear down this wall!"

Because her sense of humor has been surgically removed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boy, we like border security.  We like labor too.  What do you have to offer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

The Wall is his legacy. Hope he gets hoisted by the retard's  petard.

That's exactly what it is, it's his monument, like Ozymandias. If all that is left is part of a face in a landscape of rubble, his wish came true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ishmael said:

That's exactly what it is, it's his monument, like Ozymandias.

One of them. He could also point to his Attorney General appointees and say, "Look on my jerks, ye mighty, and despair!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now