>MOD WARNING<So...what do progressives/liberals really stand for, exactly?

Haha that's my point, it makes zero sense without any additional context.

 

Bingo! LOL!!! It makes zero sense in that it can be said about everyone.

 

Its easily supported. Leftism generally is based in fail.

 

Its little slips like this that provide a window into leftism.

Some of us actually value things in life more than politics.

Competency, for example.

But lefties scammed the US into voting for Obama-America's first affirmative action president.

 

Today's left stands for the betterment and enrichment of the gov-edu-union-contractor-grantee-trial lawyer-MSM Complex, ironically in very capitalist ways. This Complex of everything from school teachers to union bosses to entrenched crony capitalist elite contractors has grown so immense and out of control over the last 80 years that, when its dependent class is included, comprises 40-50% of the population. If the dependent part of the Complex would get out and vote in similar numbers to the private sector productive, no opposition could withstand it. Everything the Complex spews out is a lie designed to rationalize its true nature as a violent, piggish thief. It wears the sheep's clothing of social justice and identity politics over its unbridled desire to take more and more for itself from the productive middle class, via more and more exorbitant taxes and regulations, at the end of a government gun barrel. It uses the young, naïve, dumb, dependent and self-absorbed to further its goals, and most of all projects all of its plainly nauseating attributes onto its political opposition at every opportunity.

IT is the ideology of the entrenched, corporatist, crony capitalist, not its opposition. IT is the ideology of the mentally and morally weak, not its political opposition. IT is the ideology of violently unjust enrichment, not its opposition. IT is the ideology of hatred and racism, not its opposition.

 

Look dude...Trade barriers is isolationism. Secondly, I would NOT oppose him if he presented an actual , detailed plan on trade that would be good for the US, good for workers and good for the environment. I don't oppose anyone just because of who he/she is. That's what Republicans do. Does he have a plan? If so let's see it.

Interesting how you picked that one issue to come back at me on, out of all of the false allegations that you made about liberals

 

And the right depends highly on opinion and spin because the truth would destroy them and they would have zero traction.

The left is a very diverse association of political positions.

 

No. No it isn't. They were here illegally 30 or 40 years ago and they are STILL here illegally. There is nothing new. If I rob a bank and manage to get away with it for 30 years before I get caught I don't get to keep the money and I don't avoid going to jail. Lack of enforcement does not make someone less of a criminal, it simply means they were getting away with it.

 

I don't think that your idea of just doing whatever you want, and then at some point determine how much, if any, of the law we want to keep is considered "common sense" under most Western legal traditions.

This isn't just about people being in the country illegally, it's a whole host of laws involving identity theft, tax avoidance, and various misuses of Social Security numbers, all felonies, that are at issue too. Everyone gets a pass for all of that too?

 

Apparently they want more "free trade" with China and Mexico so that they can continue to hate and blame "greedy corporations". Liberal logic.

- - - Updated - - -

Good projection as always.

The same applies universally..

 

So, are you stating that Progressives dont hold the belief that government can provide a net gain in the lives of people?

 

No Bubba, I DO believe it. I disagree that it is "misbegotten" Geezzzz!!

 

And all illegals know this and are prepared to take their lumps if caught. The problem is all the people telling them otherwise....that it's no big deal....that they deserve citizenship....that this land used to belong to them...and so on. Anything other than the truth.

 

Ok now think about it. The "new situation" is the U.S. government's intention to finally deal with an old, festering issue in a new and fair way. The "same old" solutions don't apply right now because it is a "new situation".

Suppose we ignore our laws on ownership of fully automatic firearms for 20 years, and then we decide it was a mistake so we search homes for them and seize them and apply the penalties that have been on the books all the while? Is that fair?

 

With only partial control over us, hasn't our government, by its own hand, already put us twenty trillion dollars in debt?

 

You oppose re-evaluating any law for current practicality? Really? Shall I list some old laws that are on the books that aren't enforced and shouldn't be?

If you ever find yourself driving at night through rural parts of Pennsylvania, state law requires that you stop every mile to send up a rocket signal. It's true. And if you see a skittish team of horses coming toward you, be sure to take your car apart, piece by piece, and hide it under the nearest bushes&#8212;unless, of course, you want to be in violation of state law.

In Missouri you can't drive down the highway with an uncaged bear in your car by law.

In Salem, West Virginia, it's against the law to eat candy less than an hour and a half before church service.

In Winona Lake, Wisconsin, it is illegal to eat ice cream at a counter on Sunday.

In Kansas it is illegal for a restaurant to serve cherry pie on Sunday.

Marbles, Dominoes, and yo-yos are also banned on Sundays in a handful of states.

In Hartford, Connecticut, you might want to keep your dog's obedience training under wraps. It's against the law to educate dogs in that city.

In Normal , Oklahoma, be sure to restrain yourself from teasing dogs by making ugly faces. It's illegal.

In Cleveland, Ohio it is illegal for women to wear patent leather shoes in public.

In Florida a woman can be fined for falling asleep under a dryer in a hair salon. And Florida prohibits unmarried women from parachuting on Sundays.

According to Michigan state law, a woman's hair belongs to her spouse and she'll need his permission before a visit to a hair salon.
And more.... https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/top-craziest-laws-still-on-the-books

Sure these are silly laws, but the principle in question is whether reviewing laws and updating them can ever be common sense. You tell me.

No. Those are separate laws that apply to all of us.

 

Your example ignores Due Process and the 4th Amemdment. I do not oppose Due Process. I also do not support giving people a pass due to our prior ineptitude.

 

Sure they do, and they have. History and current conditions offer many examples.

 

Wow, who or what are you listening to?? Illegals are very worried. They're not "prepared".

Stop trusting Breitbart, etc.!

 

No, forcing people to smoke and then blaming tobacco companies is like forcing taxpayers to eat cow manure....... and then blaming the cow.

..-Which means your stupid analogy is just that.

 

I'm sorry you wasted so much time digging up those examples since it has nothing to do with what you were talking about. You said that you wanted something to be done about illegals first and then review the law later. Well, is the law the problem or not? If the law isn't the problem, why would you pull an amnesty?

The practical effects of those laws is that anyone meeting your criteria of someone who has been here many years and should be allowed to stay, is that almost all of them are guilty of multiple felonies. I recall an amusing part of the 2013 amnesty bill, in which part of it gave you an amnesty if you had only committed passport fraud three times (4 was apparently too much). All those people you think should be allowed to stay would be facing many years of prison time (if prosecuted) because it requires the violation of many federal laws in order to work in the US if you are not legally authorized. If you include other things like buying a house or car, that's massive loan fraud and mortgage fraud, most based on fraudulent ID's and misuse of Social Security cards. So if we waive their being in the country illegally (a civil matter in most cases) you still have a population of millions of felons who will be pulled way from their jobs and families to spend many years in federal prison.

Unless of course you want to waive away all of laws and just say screw it, which you seem to be leaning towards.

 

The government is us. We are the government. How can we be a victim of ourselves?

 

You said "I don't think that your idea of just doing whatever you want, and then at some point determine how much, if any, of the law we want to keep is considered "common sense" under most Western legal traditions."

I showed you your idea is not necessarily sensible.

I say some should get amnesty and citizenship. And note:

Amnesty: a general pardon for offenses, especially political offenses, against a government, often granted before any trial or conviction.

So amnesty would include some other things like working "under the table" and paying no taxes, probably. And some violations of laws would not be covered under "amnesty". And maybe there would be a fine or other such penalty for not paying taxes, etc. These things have been proposed.

- - - Updated - - -

LOL!!! Funny indeed.

 

Hm, do you disagree with the conventional wisdom that "we are the government, and the government is us"?

 

That seems to confirm what I suspected.