slug.com slug.com
18 7

After the terrible El Paso shooting (young white man targeting "Mexicans" ), commentators on the Left quickly put the blame on Trump, guns, and the "Great Replacement conspiracy theory" [thedailybeast.com] while those on the Right blamed liberal immigration policies. What do you think? Is this just opportunistic politics or is there something else going on?

Admin 8 Aug 9
You must be a member of this group before commenting. Join Group

Post a comment Reply Add Photo

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value evidence and civil discourse - the social network for the fans of the IDW.

Create your free account

18 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

I'm not following the argument of the right. Are they basically saying: "There are too many Mexicans, so of course someone had to shoot them?"

That does not mean you can draw a straight line from Trump or guns, though Trump has been whipping up fears of Mexicans to boost his numbers, so I'd lay this partially at Trump's feet.

damo9f Level 5 Jan 19, 2020
0

Once it becomes a political problem all rational discussion is usually not discussed. Always remember what Rahm Emanuel said about a crisis. AlI can say is, 'Thank you politicians and media for making this an emotionally charged story.' We can now create groups that we can attack and politically divide to get votes, money, and force others to support my beliefs (which are the only real beliefs).

1

Oh boy...I'm inclined to agree with the opportunistic politics notion, on my part. To me, as has been pointed out already, it's a matter of both sides--but mostly the Left, IMO--politicizing tragedy in the name of scoring virtue points above all, never mind the feelings of the bereaved family members involved. I really wish that both sides would cut that out and try to behave like grown ups, here. Simple notion, I know, but to me it's a good place to start.

5

I don't think there is a conspiracy theory to replace whites with immigrants, it is simply what happens when people don't need a dozen children to carry on the family name. White people have simply stopped reproducing. Folks in 3rd world nations where birth control is difficult to come by and children get sick and die and multiple laborers are needed for a family to survive, have more children. Americans and Europeans succeeded but now will largely be replaced because we would rather enjoy our lives rather than have a family of 12 kids. Not good or bad, just what we have.

Yeah, that "Great Replacement" conspiracy theory doesn't hold water with me, either. I keep hearing about how various areas are allegedly shipping in migrants from other countries for political ends, but I need to fact check that, among other things. What are good fact checking sites that are not as leftist as Snopes is? Serious question.

@MaskedRiderChris politifact.com has some fact checking but it has a left bias as well

4

Guy was a bigoted nutter. Everything else is bullshit politics. There are too many other logical extrapolations that would have to be applied to Bernie Sanders and the guy who tried to kill Republican and Elizabeth Warren and the guy in Dayton Ohio and on and on and on if you are attempting to put it at the feet of Trump. Evil gonna evil and rarely need a nudge. Bill Burr the comedian does a bit on this with regards to wife beating and people flipping out over a sign at a bar and he accurately stated that wife beaters are going to wife beat regardless of sign at a bar and the same thing goes for murderous bigots.

I thought I heard a Masshole accent, there! One of my people! That aside, he's spot on. I think I need to listen to more of his comedy.

@MaskedRiderChris he is a Boston boy. He is my comedic spirit animal 😛

5

From a poster:

“Mass shootings are the ultimate, all-purpose political cudgel. Remember San Bernardino? It was framed as Islamic terror, then, as a gun control problem, and even, most cynically, as “workplace violence.” The Pulse Nightclub? The experts called it Islamic terror, then homophobic violence. Fort Hood? Workplace violence, radicalization, or Islamic terrorism? Las Vegas? Who knows? It depends on who’s talking.”

I don’t think experts ever managed to prove Pulse/Orlando homophobic. That was a jihadist so out of social touch he didn’t even know what kind of club it was. The Dayton shooting seemed to be a leftist who couldn’t get laid. Which is pretty rare in college, but he wan’t in college. Or employed.

When young men become disconnected from their social milieu, they get criminal or suicidal or both (violence inward or out). Women just get pregnant. Dr. Peterson, a wise man in many ways, can give the stats. Suicide and alienation is the oldest theory in sociology, going back to the really great Durkheim. Isolate people and they die. Epstein today.

I’m not sure there is some political issue-based “cause” we can blame. The big picture is our increasingly alienated society. A quarter of millennials say they have no friends. Our sense of community had been disrupted first by TV in the 50s, now the net and videogames and smartphones today. If you don’t touch young monkeys, they die too, found Harlow. Orphanages have long known this. It’s a primate thing. I think in some sense it’s a meta-problem, beyond political narrow issues. So the question premise is wrong.

Babou Level 7 Aug 10, 2019

Of course the “experts” never proved homophobia at Pulse! That’s my point. Yet, many people called it homophobic, with zero evidence, because they wanted to push an agenda. Any discussion of cause is pure speculation.

That means anyone — notably politicians and activists — can exploit the tragedies for what ever cause they are pushing. Terrorism, workplace violence, permissive society, or the current flavour of the month, ethno-nationalism. This is all exploitation of the incident for personal and political gain.

2

Well, it would appear the Great Replacement Conspiracy Theory is well supported statistically. So perhaps the word “conspiracy” should be dropped.

Still, though, whether or not it is true, that trend does not justify violence.

8

Several factors are at play here. Firstly, we have a broken society. The concept of moral absolutes and an odd celebration of dysfunction has removed nearly all incentive and pressure to delay gratification of any kind. This also has removed any feelings of shame for bad choices and the inevitable bad outcomes they produce. Secondly, because of this extreme self centeredness the creation of healthy relationships, healthy marriages, healthy families and healthy children is disappearing. Our society is riddled with under parented, mainly fatherless, hopelessly self indulgent kids, teens and finally adults. Unfulfilled and desperate for identity and attachment until becoming numb to both. Thirdly we have allowed an inundation of unhealthy entertainment and obsessive distractions. Porn, drugs, blood and murder drenched video games, inane Internet micro interest niches, violent over sexed film and television fueling the perception that if you just do something so gross, dangerous or absurd on your YouTube channel clicks, fame, fortune, affirmation and the false perception of a connection will all be yours. Fourthly, our political leaders have been purchased by nefarious interests through lobbyists. This has created a false debate for decades between supposed conservatives and supposed liberals. Neither agenda ever being advanced as the people are just led along on a merry row. Finally because of all the societal issues created like illegal immigration and open borders utilized for profit by foreign criminal groups, the blatant Two Tiered Justice System where the elite connected are allowed full criminality as well as the ability to use the Justice System to harm and harass their opponents.From this we have the desperate realization and frustration that a self centered, unattached, amoral populous can not help but erupt at.

Mental health reforms with new diagnostics for anti social violence potential with monitoring, treatment and no access to weapons may help but in the end we must begin to fix our obvious problems politically and culturally. Trump is trying on the political front but the other half will require a spiritual renewal and the chances of that are woefully slim!

Reasonable positions. I'm not sure spiritual renewal is required. You can see a secular version having success in theory. HOWEVER, what we've seen from the secular side is they're really ill-equipped to even understand what they're mucking with. The truth is the church is leagues ahead of them in understanding emotions, attachment/connection--even responsibility and the value of moral roles. It's actually disappointing to me how poorly secular society has managed their appeal for change. They muck with structures they don't at all understand--they wash them away with nothing in mind to replace them. God knows the church has created a lot of problems, but nothing compared to the ill-considered destruction propagated by seculars. MOST of this garbage we're experiencing now dumps right in their laps.

I think it was a JP point I heard, but I thought it was brilliant when he said history carries with it the summation of everything we've learned, and it's inherently better to draw from that body of knowledge in our progression. Abandoning history in some kind of childish tantrum is the most arrogant, self-obsessed kind of myopia. The church has been a huge influence on culture over a long time. Ignoring it simply--as they say--dooms us to repeat our mistakes.

As we use to say "RIGHT ON"!!!

@chuckpo secular won't succeed? The nation was better when secular logic was the default. JFK gave a speech as to why his Catholic belief wouldn't sway his judgement as president. The word Christianity was used to umbrella all Bible based faiths in to one political party, the repubs. Only recently has Christianity been a thing when before people called themselves by the denomination rather than just say they were a Christian. This country has went straight downhill since this happened as corporate policy is passed by right wingers who claim Christian morals that they don't care about just to get votes. Trump is the epitome of using the word just to gain votes. His actions show he don't really care one bit about a religion. Our founders plainly stated we were a secular nation and we continued to grow and prosper until Reagan came along hiding behind the Christian tag and destroyed the system that had created the biggest middle class in history, FDRs policy. If u want to make America great again we would have to go back to the secular style policy that made us great before the right wing destroyed the system followed by Bill Clinton selling out the workers party to Wall Street as well. Since "Christianity" was invented and politicized it has done nothing but serve to fool good people in to voting against their interests due to lack of time to actually research and be informed.

@george

  1. I was looking for where I said 'secular won't succeed.' What I did say was the secular side screwed up a lot of stuff. I don't think that's debatable. I consider myself mostly on the secular side, with some influence from a higher intelligence/God.

  2. I'd have to disagree with your definition of Christianity. It already has a very specific meaning. OBVIOUSLY, Christianity isn't a right-wing thing. That's preposterous--simply not true. How does that even work since I know tons of self-proclaimed Christians who are Democrats?

  3. You're clearly very angry, but I'd also disagree that the country went downhill due to any church thing. I'm often VERY critical of the church. I HATE the judgement and condemnation too often emanating from it. But, the problems we have today are due to ill-considered shifts the secular side introduced in their assault on the church. The seculars literally became the assholes, and they did on such a grand scale that they forgot to even consider what would happen if they won. Extraordinarily short-sided and even puerile and naive.

  4. What people like you don't understand about Trump is Trump listened to the goddamned people! How fucking tough is that? ONE of your side COULD TRY THAT, NO? Trump leaned on the power of the people, and he heard what it's like to be a non-leftist in this country. YOUR failure to understand what happened doesn't in any way negate the reality of what is. Suck on that for awhile, haha. And, Trump has a better grasp on religion than you do, as evidenced in your diatribe.

  5. I don't think you understand what our founding fathers said either. Why in the fuck would they create a secular country and add God all over the place? Come on, did you think this through before you started typing? That's annoying.

  6. You don't get Reagan either. Go history some.

@chuckpo

  1. U said the secular people muck it up which is 100% wrong because up until the 70s everyone had to show they wouldn't let their denominational beliefs dictate their policy. Just look up Kennedy's speech, it is on YouTube. Before "C"hristianity came along people realizes each church had differences but now the religion is one big group label even tho none of the denominations agree on the meaning of the Bible.

  2. "C"hristianity is not christianity in the way politics uses it. If u know democrats that are christian then why is it ignored and the right wing use it as their foundation and act as those on the left don't understand it all. Jesus said feed the hungry and care for the sick and the right wing hates policy that would do that unlike the left.

  3. I'm angry? U can't read setting without placing emotional context on it? Seems u are the angry one if that is what u see from my post because all I did was point out historical fact. Guess u don't like facts or something. The Christians are the ones that took over and destroyed it by fooling ignorant people into voting for the Christian politicians, not secular people.

  4. Wow! When did I mention Trump? It might surprise u to hear this because u think u are a mind reader and know my emotions and all but I got nothing against Trump. He has been more left leaning than the democrat party has for decades. Trump even proves my point, he couldn't even say a chapter of the Bible the correct way but "C"hristians fell for him hook line and sinker because of the umbrella issue I speak of. Anything else u care to make up about me then attack? Just shows u have lost this already because u want to focus more on me instead of facts. How very Antifa of u. U would fit in great with them if this is how u react to any thing u don't like.

  5. Treaty of Tripoli. READ IT. Plainly stated we aren't founded on Christianity. They mention creator yes but never a specific one because most of the were deists and not Bible badgers. It's u that needs a history lesson here.

  6. Got Reagan covered just fine but believe as u want. U already proved what a great psychic u are when u knew I was angry and missed the ball on it completely and when u made up what I think about Trump. It's amazing how much u sound and respond just like an AOC supporter, only difference is the names and ideas change between the two. Emotional and psychic abilities are common traits of both the left and right wing tribalistic folks. U would think u all were siblings with how much u share in common.

@chuckpo 1950s is when god was added to the pledge and put on money, it wasn't the founders who did that. The founders were not in any way focusing on Christianity and that is just the fact of history. U like to tell me to research history but it's obvious u are the one lacking in that area if u think we were founded on Christianity. From the 50s to the late 70s is when the religious groups consolidated and the propaganda was used to fool the people who actually don't know the history of this country. Reagan was the first to finally have the backing of "C"hristianity and he used that to screw average working Americans and change the system to serve the corporate elites. The Clinton came along and sold out the left wing to Wall Street and we have just went more and more downhill since. 1980 and forward has been the destruction of American workers hidden in a nice package of Christianity with the right and identity BS with the left. That is the history of it. Nothing more, nothing less.

@george

U said the secular people muck it up which is 100% wrong because up until the 70s everyone had to show they wouldn't let their denominational beliefs dictate their policy. Just look up Kennedy's speech, it is on YouTube. Before "C"hristianity came along people realizes each church had differences but now the religion is one big group label even tho none of the denominations agree on the meaning of the Bible.

AS A SECULAR (as defined by the religious), bunk! You're just angry. Secularism/humanism have become a religion. It's just YOUR religion, so you don't want to look at it like that. Jesus, that's myopic. SECULARS herded the denominations into one label, 'the church' for convenience/group identity politics kinds of stuff. It's a pejorative. I don't mind talking to you about this, but you need to think more about context.

"C"hristianity is not christianity in the way politics uses it. If u know democrats that are christian then why is it ignored and the right wing use it as their foundation and act as those on the left don't understand it all. Jesus said feed the hungry and care for the sick and the right wing hates policy that would do that unlike the left.

Why aren't Christian Democrats screaming about this? Good question. Probably because they're terrified by their own party's judgment and condemnation, which is REALLY Interesting considering the historical worldview of the church.

The Right doesn't 'use it as their foundation' due to any other reason than it is their foundation. It's who they are. To act outside of that is what would be questionable. You've just demonized 'the church' and have downgraded their humanity and value. So, the question you're actually asking is 'how can they believe what they believe?' You're just being preposterous. UNTRUE. The right wing does NOT in any way 'hate policies that would feed the hungry and care for the sick.' That's just nonsense--bigotry, really. I know LOADS of conservatives--and religious people--that DONATE their money to good causes AND give money to the homeless. It's part of the mission of churches, for God's sake! That's no joke. You're wrong by a wide margin. It's in the church's charter--across denominations. Great example of your bigotry. FLAT WRONG.

I'm angry? U can't read setting without placing emotional context on it? Seems u are the angry one if that is what u see from my post because all I did was point out historical fact. Guess u don't like facts or something. The Christians are the ones that took over and destroyed it by fooling ignorant people into voting for the Christian politicians, not secular people.

I'm angry when I read bigoted screeds. But, not that angry. You're using your anger and hatred to spread things that are FALSE about people you clearly loathe. That's not okay. Why are you doing this? Your facts are WRONG based on being sorely incomplete. You need to know more. Go learn some stuff--challenge your own beliefs--and then come back and present a better argument. You sound like a raving bigot, so if that's not your intention, then go educate yourself and present an objective case. Your paragraph is simply nonsense--shockingly.

Wow! When did I mention Trump? It might surprise u to hear this because u think u are a mind reader and know my emotions and all but I got nothing against Trump. He has been more left leaning than the democrat party has for decades. Trump even proves my point, he couldn't even say a chapter of the Bible the correct way but "C"hristians fell for him hook line and sinker because of the umbrella issue I speak of. Anything else u care to make up about me then attack? Just shows u have lost this already because u want to focus more on me instead of facts. How very Antifa of u. U would fit in great with them if this is how u react to any thing u don't like.

Trump is an example I raised. I'm allowed. Look at me, I'm running with scissors too. I'll write what I want, you write what you want (but, I recommend you educate yourself). Dude, please don't think we're debating. You're unarmed. I'm not saying it's a capacity issue. You just haven't prepared yourself with sufficient knowledge. Are you far-right? Honest question.

Treaty of Tripoli. READ IT. Plainly stated we aren't founded on Christianity. They mention creator yes but never a specific one because most of the were deists and not Bible badgers. It's u that needs a history lesson here.

I'll follow my own advice and check this out.

Got Reagan covered just fine but believe as u want. U already proved what a great psychic u are when u knew I was angry and missed the ball on it completely and when u made up what I think about Trump. It's amazing how much u sound and respond just like an AOC supporter, only difference is the names and ideas change between the two. Emotional and psychic abilities are common traits of both the left and right wing tribalistic folks. U would think u all were siblings with how much u share in common.

I forgot what you're babbling about. Is there a point in this paragraph? Actually, since you brought it up, you sound like AOC--shoots her mouth off with NO understanding of what she's talking about. Same age range? No, you're a little older. Seriously, I'm just a guy in nowhere, USA. You can be really angry with me and it won't change your life at all. Educate yourself on what we're talking about. It looks like you saw me NOT attack the church and it triggered you. I can understand that. I've seen some bad stuff from the church too. But, what group has there not been bad stuff from? Church people are no worse and no better than secular people. Secular people have made HUGE mistakes--just like church people. I don't think that's a controversial statement. The secular side made a lot of mistakes that have led us to where we are in the country--a lot of people from my area--academics--even the 'mental health' profession as a whole. I think they've made these mistakes in response to judgment and condemnation doled out by the church, but they're mistakes all the same--costly mistakes. I'm sorry you see that as some kind of defense of the church. It's a criticism of the seculars and shows us to be just as fallible as religious people.

@george

1950s is when god was added to the pledge and put on money, it wasn't the founders who did that. The founders were not in any way focusing on Christianity and that is just the fact of history. U like to tell me to research history but it's obvious u are the one lacking in that area if u think we were founded on Christianity. From the 50s to the late 70s is when the religious groups consolidated and the propaganda was used to fool the people who actually don't know the history of this country. Reagan was the first to finally have the backing of "C"hristianity and he used that to screw average working Americans and change the system to serve the corporate elites. The Clinton came along and sold out the left wing to Wall Street and we have just went more and more downhill since. 1980 and forward has been the destruction of American workers hidden in a nice package of Christianity with the right and identity BS with the left. That is the history of it. Nothing more, nothing less.

Fair enough. I will go check myself. I'm not accepting your interpretation. I think that's just your own junk and anger spilling in. But, I'll check on the founding fathers stuff.

@george, I'm still looking at it, but the declaration of independence was signed in what, 1776?

Interestingly is the mention of God in nearly all of the state constitutions, including early ones. 'Creator', 'Lord' would be other references..

I'll keep looking, because it's interesting, and I didn't know that about the money. I should also note here I don't personally disagree about the separation of church and state. I don't want a state Church. We don't have a state Church. HOWEVER, as citizens of the US, church people have just as much right to influence politics as atheists, no? And, there's a whole freaking lot of them--that's power. Who are their representatives going to be? Muslims are influencing politics, and trying to push as much of it as they can into the state. That's pretty much what Christians do. Anyway, this started NOT based on Christianity, but because I criticized seculars/ humanists. It's a fine diversion, but don't lose site of your criticism of my op.

So, I've found some early stuff that does, in fact, mention 'God, Lord, Creator (among some other terms and phrases). AND, we must consider that the vast majority of US citizens throughout history self-identify as Christians and a majority of US citizens now do. 95% of the US identified as Christian in 1950. 72% in 2017. Digging up the history in the 1700s is harder, but the only real religious influence seems to be Christianity, so we can make some inferences on that. They recorded stuff differently. Like church attenders. But, other anecdotal evidence states that a ton of people didn't go to church. Some imply they were non-religious, but it seems unlikely, and other people imply that most people who didn't go to church self-identified as Christian. In any case, I think you can see why Christianity is such a strong influence in politics naturally. If 70 million libertarian voters existed, a libertarian would have been elected. Instead, the Republicans and Democrats split most of the votes. People vote for what closely aligns with them. Luckily for you, Christians disagree on stuff. They're not a single voting block. If that was the case, you'd lose and it wouldn't be close. What do you do about it? California voted against gay marriage some years ago, and their supreme court in SF, I think, overturned the voters. Obviously, the voters amounted to a whole lot of religious people. But, what are you going to do? Invalidate everything they vote for? So, in the name of the state, you adopt tyranny? Dangerous. Some things are moral dilemmas.

But anyway, it looks like you win the money argument. I was wrong, and the 'In God We Trust' thing was a 1950s thing. However, I still disagree with your interpretations and conclusions about it--assigning nefarious meaning. People fighting over identity, and there's some evidence that 'secularism/humanism' was being pushed. As secularism/humanism is pushed like it's a religion, then there's little difference between their influence and the Christian's influence. We've seen the church go too far. We've also seen the secular go too far. Right now, the pendulum has swung and the seculars are going WAY too far. Why is it important? Because the force will lead to the next swing of the pendulum. And, what might that look like? Hope toward moderation, fear toward tyranny.

Sorry, you're probably getting tagged every time I update this post. But, this is a complicated conversation. Interesting article on African Muslims and slavery in early America. What's striking is then to think about which people had influence. Clearly, even then Christians were the influential presence--the skin color-racism thing didn't help.

[nmaahc.si.edu]

@chuckpo wow! U still claiming I'm angry? No wonder nothing ever changes. To many psychics and mind readers in America think they can know what someone thinks and feels just from basic text communications. It's useless talking to people like u because u don't listen to anything but instead project your own emotions on to others to justify your own anger. U make up what u want and then talk about the things u make up so u can use your talking points against everyone because u lack fundamental knowledge. This is exactly why our country is in such bad shape.

Since we are going down this path I would appreciate u telling me my future as well. It's obvious u have such great powers in the psychic world with all the things u keep getting wrong so it would be a good laugh for me to see u try to make up a full life for me completely.

@george, didn't read it all, huh? Hahahaha--or anything else. Yeesh, I went and started researching our conversation--the stuff I'm weak on. You prepared by--no wait, you didn't prepare. Nice!

@chuckpo and to answer your question, I'm not right or left. Any reasonable person can see both sides have goods and bads.

@chuckpo Yes I read it all and if u keep researching u will see I'm right on more than just the 50s thing. It's just a waste of time to converse with people who want to tell me how I feel and think, esp when they admit I was right and they were wrong about one thing but insist they still are better prepared and know more. I've learned to put the truth out and if people really want truth instead of partisan BS they can research for their self.

@george, no you're not. While I'm not an expert in the history of US currency, I have been a student of social/psychological factors formally and informally for most of my life. You have this obvious angry screed against Christians, and you're going to hide now behind 'what you think and feel' without having researched anything. Took me 1 minute to determine the currency thing--same amount of time it took you to learn it. No investment. Don't be retarded. I owned my mistake, and now you want to use that to your advantage. That's really, really weak. I mean, sorely ignorant psychological manipulation--childish argument fare. I was up front with you--real, and you do this shit--hahahaha, just more evidence of your anger. You don't know shit about socio-political factors--CLEARLY. Educate yourself--a little humility would help. You know, the kind of humility it took me to go check myself and then step up to own my mistake. You're a coward.

@chuckpo and I'm still angry... lmao

U just can't discuss anything unless u make sure the other person is a certain way so that your programming still works, huh?

@george still hiding behind ignorance and unwilling to just go do some fucking reading, huh? Just go do some reading. If you're going to talk about it, learn something about it. You called me on a sloppy point I made. I WENT AND EDUCATED MYSELF! I'm calling you on everything else you said. FOR EXAMPLE--YOU SAID:

Jesus said feed the hungry and care for the sick and the right wing hates policy that would do that unlike the left.

WRONG. YOU'RE WRONG. 100% WRONG. Let me see, am I being clear? Ummm, you're wrong. Go figure out why you're wrong. LEARN something.

I could pull out a number of other assertions you wrote that are just flat out wrong and judgmental and reveal your contempt. Are you man enough to go look for the truth, or will you just keep throwing shade because you're an angry insecure child? Come on, man. Take a chance for once. Go study this for yourself, so you can correct your ignorance.

I'll never again suggest that US currency has always said In God We Trust. I educated myself. Will you go on and on pushing this point and end up lying to defend it?

@chuckpo there is nothing to look for. The right wing is against food stamps and healthcare. They say to leave it to charity when we already have charities setup and they aren't covering what is needed. If people were covered we would lead the industrial world in poverty and have over 30 MIL people uninsured. Weinstein is the only right winger I've seen that has a decent stance on these issues but the rest of them just scream socialism and communism because they are ignorant and just stay in a bubble of bias or they are profiting from pushing the propaganda.

@chuckpo and the left wing just gives voice to the issues then pass right wing policy once elected. That's why Obama passed RomneyCare. There is no left wing anymore. Bill Clinton sold it to Wall Street. The dems are center right and repubs are right when it comes to policy passed. I couldn't care less about campaign lies to gain votes from uninformed people, I look at the actual policy. Like I said, I'm not for the left or right wing of USA politics, I understand how it all works to well to fall for it. They are all one big team that puts on theater at election time.

@george, oh okay, you're far, far, far left and VERY angry. I'm sorry I responded, hahahaha. Let's not continue this. It's stupid. Take care.

@chuckpo I'm far far left now? How is it a far far lefties agrees with Trump on many issues? Furthermore, u don't even know what policy I do support but once again, that psychic ability of yours shines dimly.

And since u are an alt right fascist nazi that is full of self hate and bitterness, I guess we shouldn't continue. See how easy I can just make up what I want about u too. Take the easy way out by going to personal attacks about things that u make up in your head. It happens all the time when I try to show reality to people and they can only see tribalistic right wing versus left wing. Usually it's the feminists and identity PC crowd that uses that style but it is becoming common across the board anymore.

@george, fudk, haha.

3

Hello. I think that the increasing number of mass-shootings is a secondary problem, so is the increase of mental illnesses. What is the primary problem? I don't know. I somehow don't think it is as simple as immigration. Anyway, someone has to identify it so that the primary problem is properly addressed and not patching up the secondary problems, which is endless and won't lead to any ultimate solution. In the meantime, I feel that politicians just can't get enough of political wrestling while the media continue to enjoy playing mind games, and we are all caught up right in the middle, feeling ignored and helpless...

Naomi Level 8 Aug 10, 2019

Or feeling outraged and not knowing why, half the time? My sense of outrage comes from knowing just how much the media has a vested interest in pushing a toxic and harmful narrative in place of actual news fueled by facts, more than anything else, right now, on my part.

Hello MaskedRiderChris. Your sense of outrage is shared by many, I'm sure.

1

I think that blood of the victims in El Paso is on the hand of Democrats and Republicans alike. Both Party are for open borders for different benefits. The Borders are open and flood of illegals are continue to flow. I not condone evil behavior of the shooter but I could understand his frustration. When Government not doing its primary duty to defend as from foreign invasion, some unbalance people could take its responsibility in their hands unfortunately.
About Great Replacement Conspiracy. I don’t think it is the Conspiracy. Look what is going on in Europe. It is UN actual plan to replace people from not developed Countries to Western World. It is part of World Wide Wealths Redistribution. Guys, if I wanted to immigrate from former USSR to Uganda or India, I would do it 29 years ago. But I intentionally wanted immigrate to USA. I am 78 years Old. I don’t care if tomorrow I will find myself in Guatemala. I care about my almost two ears Grandson. I wanted him live in the Republic. Not in Democracy or Communism but In REPUBLIC.

PetrVo Level 4 Aug 10, 2019
2

The do-nothing Paul Ryan Swampublican House had the perfect opportunity to pass Federal Voter I.D. during the Russian. Collusion Hoax. The Dems couldn't vote against it due to their allegations of election fraud. Proves that Paul Ryan was a co-conspirator hoping to be handed the Presidency as Speaker.

Facci Level 7 Aug 9, 2019
5

Mass shootings are the ultimate, all-purpose political cudgel. Remember San Bernardino? It was framed as Islamic terror, then, as a gun control problem, and even, most cynically, as “workplace violence.” The Pulse Nightclub? The experts called it Islamic terror, then homophobic violence. Fort Hood? Workplace violence, radicalization, or Islamic terrorism? Las Vegas? Who knows? It depends on who’s talking.

The supremacy motive is popular now because it’s a convenient way to pin the blame on Donald Trump. And it makes sense, if you believe mass shootings only became an issue in 2016.

GeeMac Level 7 Aug 9, 2019
1

Yup. Racial extinction has occurred many times in history. Look at the Native Americans. Look at the native, original Japanese people. Look at almost any native population. To deny that such a thing is possible is already ludicrous. To deny that it's happening now is simply insanity.

Coyuga Level 6 Aug 9, 2019
3

Yes- it's opportunity politics for the LEFT progressives ofcourse..:NEXT IN ORDER-Social media, along with the cultural wide spread push for the need that everyone should gain individual importance and recognition, is what's TOTALLY creating the bait for the very small few in numbers(deranged shooters), who feel they are unrecognized by society according to their personal standards, and they are extremely disturbed and unable to adapt to the bullshit the rest of us are having to do...Basically, they are pussies for not being able to figure out how to adjust, relax, and just try and live within the current culture...The solution is too inappropriate to say.

5

In previous congressional debates Republicans offered total immigration amnesty if Democrats agreed to no voting rights for the illegal immigrants. If this wasn't about changing the electoral landscape they would have agreed.

Two classes of citizens with different rights based on their ethnicity, where have I heard that before...

@WilyRickWiles Not ethnicity. Citizenry.

@WilyRickWiles Legal status not ethnic status. There are millions of legal Hispanic Americans.

Howdy @WilyRickWiles,

illegal immigrants have no right to vote and they are not citizens

@Facci, @timon_phocas Does amnesty not imply naturalization? I can understand how it might just mean forgiveness of any immigration violations, but then why mention voting? Only citizens can vote in national elections.

Howdy @WilyRickWiles,

Amnesty is about forgiveness for breaking immigration law. Amnesty is about residence permits. Amnesty is not about citizenship.

@Don_Provolone Passport or birth certificate when registering.

@timon_phocas So as I previously asked, why mention voting?

@Don_Provolone Most states as far as I know.

Howdy @WilyRickWiles

Because changing the electorate is the whole purpose of the Democratic immigration enterprise.

@Don_Provolone And how do you get that ID... Sure you might be able to cast a fraudulent provisional ballot, but those are checked if not tossed.

@timon_phocas Sounds like a conspiracy theory. Regardless, again, non-citizens can't vote in national elections.

@Don_Provolone Besides, call me when there's significant evidence of such fraudulent voting.

@WilyRickWiles
One ringydingy...
[heritage.org]

@Don_Provolone You generally have to provide documentation of your status when you apply for a driver's license.

I'm saying most provisional ballots are tossed--not "all our ballots."

And don't forget, we're a nation of laws. If you manage to fraudulently vote, you are violating state and federal law.

@WilyRickWiles I really want to know, and you can message me privately with complete confidentiality, but are you trolling people or are these your genuine opinions and observations of society?

@WilyRickWiles The key word is citizens.

2

"while those on the Right blamed liberal immigration policies"

Well that's a disturbing thought--basically blaming immigrants for their own mass murder. I knew the right was sadistic, but not that sadistic.

To be clear, I am referring to policies... Not people.

Traversing deserts and forging rivers for hundreds of miles amongs murderous gang members and drug traffickers to illegally invade a foreign nation is suicidal. Encouraging that behaviour is manslaughter.

@Admin I'm not sure how that makes it any better. The logic it implies is: "The mass murder of Latino immigrant-presenting people happened because the US government let lots of immigrants in from Mexico and Central America." Yes, the implied fault ultimately lies with the policies, but it also implies that the outcome of those policies--migration--naturally provokes mass murder of the subject of that outcome--migrants.

Both sides fall for the political and media emotionally charge explanation for the evil deed someone does. If a bank is robbed and someone gets shot, do we blame the customers or bank?

blaming immigrants for their own mass murder - Happens all the time in cartel controlled Mexico, Columbia, ......

8

I blamed the shooter.

Facci Level 7 Aug 9, 2019

That's who should just get the blame, the shooter. Adults are responsible for their own actions. By the way, thank you for the Coins donation, much appreciated.

13

The disgust from people who eventually voted for Trump is what led to Trump. Well, here is the source of that disgust. The left has gone WAY TOO FAR in dehumanizing the non-left, and the non-left is starting to increase and escalate their responses. Being associated with these shooters in any way is beyond preposterous--literally 100% WRONG. Having those accusations leveled by politicians and the mainstream media is outrageous. THAT's what's going on here for the non-left. Has nothing to do with immigration. Has nothing to do with guns or race. The non-left is literally fighting a fight for existence--the right to exist as human beings--the right to think independently from the left. All of this is the non-left standing up to horrific behavior of the left. Trump is a proxy for his voters to stand up to the out-of-control left. That's all that's going on here.

Then, below that, some asshole killed a bunch of people, and there is, in reality, some explanation for it. We can't get past the culture war to even have the conversation about why this is happening. But, these are two separate conversations.

chuckpo Level 7 Aug 9, 2019

Here, here!

What would it become if a Latino massacred those people in El Paso?

Write Comment