No ID required. License to steal.

[Scouts Honor]

2 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

One?  Easy....community parks.  

not a stalker..

where do you live

[WrestlingRasta]

1 minute ago, Scouts Honor said:

not a stalker..

where do you live

South Florida. But what I say above doesn’t just come from my home community (although obviously carrying heavy weight)….I’m around a bit. 

Edited July 9 by WrestlingRasta

[Scouts Honor]

ppl there are concerned about community parks.. are you talking beach access? 

[WrestlingRasta]

6 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

ppl there are concerned about community parks.. are you talking beach access? 

No…parks, recreation, programming, etc.  

[Scouts Honor]

i just read your post from another thread...

i think most were being polite...

and the rest probably wanted to ignore the problem

 

like biden and most democrats did for 3 years...

'it;s not happening'

etc

[WrestlingRasta]

6 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

i just read your post from another thread...

i think most were being polite...

and the rest probably wanted to ignore the problem

 

like biden and most democrats did for 3 years...

'it;s not happening'

etc

I’m not following? 

[Scouts Honor]

they avoided the other topics

being polite

[Scouts Honor]

i think france did pretty well as well

[WrestlingRasta]

Just now, Scouts Honor said:

they avoided the other topics

being polite

Oh you’re talking about where I wrote about the conversation I had yesterday morning at work.  
 

So what you’re saying to me is that even though you were not at all involved in those different conversations throughout those fours days, you’re resting on the fact that you know those people’s perceptions and where they are coming from in their views.  Got it. 
 

That is a nice and safe way to think when you don’t want your own ideas challenged.  I’ll give you that.  

[JimmyBT]

Nice cop out 

[WrestlingRasta]

[fishbane]

On 7/8/2024 at 5:24 PM, headshuck said:

Literally half that stuff can be done without a photo ID. Probably over half.  

The partisan split on the topic of voter ID almost entirely boils down to the demographics of those who would need to get a photo ID in order to comply with the law and don't otherwise have one.  This is essentially those without a driver's license which are disproportionately young people and/or residents in urban areas.  These individuals have historically voted for Democrats at a higher rate than Republican candidates.  If the reverse were true, Republicans might still be worried about election security but they wouldn't be pushing for laws requiring that photo ID be presented.

[WrestlingRasta]

My stalker can’t help but follow me and chime in even when he has absolutely nothing to say. His need for attention is kinda cute, isn’t it? 

[ionel]

1 hour ago, WrestlingRasta said:

No…parks, recreation, programming, etc.  

Folks don't want parks no more they want pickleball courts. 

Just mostly kidding.  Played pickleball in a KC park ~half mile from our vrbo, nice houses around the park.  Folks in the houses don't like people using the park.  They had shut down half the courts, the remote work at home folks thought it too noisy and courts weren't that close to the houses.   I've found similar with cycling, some folks just get annoyed when they see others outside getting exercise.  

[ThreePointTakedown]

19 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Sorry, didn't mean 'pet project' as a dig. Just that people prioritize things differently. 

Have you looked at the polls? Who has put them on? Are you fluent in reading and breaking down polls? If not, who do you trust as a source? 

Just for clarification it doesn't use the word 'illegals' why do you? The word is 'encounters'. This could be from legal, asylum seeking people, right? Do you feel it is not 'legal' for someone to cross the border to seek asylum, if so, why is that? Or from people that do not plan to seek asylum. Why keep using that word, one is legal and one is illegal. Those groups are not the same. 

The executive branch is in charge of the border. Congress passes the laws but the executive appoints the head of the departments. Do you feel that is wrong? How would you fix it? Should all things flow through congress, would that be a more efficient way of proceeding on the border issue on a day-to-day basis? 

It is a widely studied and corroborated fact that immigrants both legal and illegal are a net positive in the US. And immigrants are being harmed, when the cross the border legally and enter this country they are being harmed. Even people perceived to be immigrants(much like attacks on Asian-American people sky rocketed when the pandemic started, why do you think that was, maybe a moron at 1600 kept making RACIST REMARKS with regard to COVID-19?!) Your characterization of all immigrants as illegals(I say that because you do not mention legal immigration, either through the asylum process or otherwise, which are LEGAL) seems to indicate your lack of empathy for people struggling to survive. Why is that? Or is your opinion just an quasi-isolationist(America First) kinda thing? 

And its dangerous. It promotes division and allows for the rationalization of violence onto a perceived enemy. Which they are not!

 

18 hours ago, Bigbrog said:

I'll play your game.

What percentage of people coming across the border claim asylum?  Are they instantly considered "legal" at that point?  Is there, or should there be a vetting process to determine legality of their crossing?  Can claiming "asylum" ever be disproven?

Does the word "illegal" really bother you that much?  

What racists remarks were made by "a moron at 1600"?  Be specific and prove why they are racists.  Why wouldn't they all be characterized as "illegals" when in fact they are until vetted...no?  How is it un-empathetic to make sure everyone is vetted before being let into the country?  Have you asked those people if they feel bad because of a word?   Where does the word "quasi-isolationist" come from??  What is wrong with America First??  Do you not want to make America First?  Isn't letting people come here LEGALLY not one of the things that make America a great country?  Who on here is against letting people come here LEGALLY?  

Do you want open borders?  For all?  Just specific groups?  Do you think what is going on now is okay and is sustainable?

Does your last two sentences have any basis in reality other than in your fragile mind?

Questions on asylum, first, yes, if they claim asylum they have arrived here LEGALLY. Does 'legal' mean 'citizen'? No. The legal process has begun so they are allowed to stay if they meet certain criteria and meet certain benchmarks. Percentage: I can't seem to find a solid number but I did find that 40% of asylum seekers have been granted entry out of 700,000 cases since 2000. Which is not many, if we are to think millions upon millions have entered illegally in just the last few years. Which is also a stat I have not found a credible source for. Have you? 

There is a vetting process. Its filing for asylum. That is the process. 

Disproven or not proven enough. Supposedly about 60% of the time it can. 

These questions seem to highlight a lack of preparedness on your part. Did you even try looking for information on this topic or did you just latch onto the first bit of negative propaganda that was fed to you? Cuz the hook suck deep, in that case. 

Lets continue.

The word 'illegal' if used in certain ways is racist. But lets move beyond that, its the wrong usage and you should be interested in that. There are several groups you are referring to and they should have different labels. Some are illegal immigrants, they are people and should be thought of as such. The other are asylum seeking immigrants or to use another word refugees. If you cared, which it seems as though you don't, you would work to differentiate them in your vernacular. If for no other reason than to not sound, at best ignorant, or at worst, racist.  

I won't repeat the words of bigot/president but they were because 45 is a bigot and a racist. We all heard they utter the nickname of the virus. They said it multiple times. It is racist. No proof is required. 

'Illegal' until vetted: answered above. 

'Unempathetic' without vetting first: It is. Analogy: if your neighbor's house is on fire you don't quibble about the cost of your garden hose. We trust them that they feel they were/are in danger. That's what friends do. Does it turn out not to be the case sometimes? Yes. But to lump everyone together as 'illegals' is to quote you, 'unempathetic' 

Feel bad because of a word: I haven't. Nor should I need to considering my response above. I'm sure they don't care. But conversing with someone that purports to take the topic seriously. You should be interested in communicating more effectively, your points. Proper, or at least agreed upon, nomenclature would help. 

'Quasi-isolationist': is what America First means. It was coined before ww2 when we didn't want to stop Germany from taking over Europe. A group was started to try to influence the country to stay out of ww2. Not a great slogan or opinion to resurrect. But that's par for the course of a party with no new ideas. 

Wrong with America First: see above. 

Make America First: Watch the Newroom. We are not first. Have never been first. I personally don't want us to be first. America is first at just three things: incarcerated prisoners per capita, number of adults who believe angels are real, and defense spending. 

Immigration makes/made America a great country: sure, I can get behind that. Those immigrants were rarely treated/received well. Likely do to similar conversations happening at the time of their arrivals: Irish, Italian, Polish, German, Asian, Latin, African. People here, didn't want them because they were convinced that the new people would 'steal' what they had to fight for. Does that ever really happen? No. 

45 was against people coming here legally. Lots of people that worked in the administration only wanted certain people to be allowed to come here. That's racist. On here, seeing as you conflate the legal entry process with the illegal entry process, either on accident or on purpose, you do. 

Firstly, borders are imaginary lines. There are no borders. Help people make a better life. We do that, we all win. 

'Fragile mind': honestly, is this your way of dismissing my opinions and critiques of your behavior so you don't have to take them seriously? Using 'illegals' in the way that you have done in the past is a way of Otherizing people. This is the thing you may be looking for as to what makes us the best. Because the United States is great at otherizing people. We did it with Native Americans to rationalize stealing their land for gold, oil, ore, or just the land for the land's sake. The Irish when they came over during a famine. Italians when they came over.  Africans, when they... really ever since they were brought here or came over. We make enemies from 'different' people really well. Its dangerous and wrong and your rhetoric only adds to it. So either out of ignorance or on purpose you are leading to the endangerment of a group of people because you don't care enough to look at them as humans first. If the opposite of that is a 'fragile mind'. SIGN. ME. UP! 

That was fun. We should do it more often. 

If you've read this far, I challenge you to answer all of my questions that you decided not to with your first response. I look forward to reading them or your (less than)clever way of dodging the opportunity. 

 

[ThreePointTakedown]

19 hours ago, Scouts Honor said:

https://nypost.com/2024/06/14/us-news/how-non-citizens-are-getting-voter-registration-forms-across-the-us-and-how-republicans-are-trying-to-stop-it/

Seriously. This is what you're so afraid of. 

Someone was given a form? Someone got something delivered in the mail that wasn't intended for them? 

Did they fill them out? Were they mailed/delivered back? Were they entered into the system? Did the system flag them for not qualifying to vote? 

Y'all love making mountains out of mole hills when it suits you. 

Show me the finish line? Show me where this has actually happened instead of just a hint, of whisper, of a rumor. 

You have nothing. 

And the NY Post of all places. Is not reputable at all. Siting no sources of the info and quoting(not for the story specifically but to keep you clutching your pearls) CHIP 'em effin' ROY of all people. Could you scrape any more wood from the bottom of that barrel. 

Please for the love of Roland, get better sources. We talk all about 'vetting immigrants'. Vet your sources of information for reliability. Not just that they say the thing that you believe, just louder. 

Its embarrassing. 

[Ohio Elite]

8 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

won't repeat the words of bigot/president but they were because 45 is a bigot and a racist. We all heard they utter the nickname of the virus. They said it multiple times. It is racist. No proof is required

You talking about the ching chang chong virus?

[Bigbrog]

5 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

 

Questions on asylum, first, yes, if they claim asylum they have arrived here LEGALLY. Does 'legal' mean 'citizen'? No. The legal process has begun so they are allowed to stay if they meet certain criteria and meet certain benchmarks. Wouldn't they be "un-legal" until they are determined to infact be "refugees"??  Percentage: I can't seem to find a solid number but I did find that 40% of asylum seekers have been granted entry out of 700,000 cases since 2000. Which is not many, if we are to think millions upon millions have entered illegally in just the last few years. Which is also a stat I have not found a credible source for. Have you?  I have not found a number either...my point was it appears as an easy way out to come here by just simply claiming asylum.  I never claimed millions and millions have entered here illegally.  I claim that to many come here illegally.

There is a vetting process. Its filing for asylum. That is the process.  Of course there is....do you know the process?

Disproven or not proven enough. Supposedly about 60% of the time it can. 

These questions seem to highlight a lack of preparedness on your part. Did you even try looking for information on this topic or did you just latch onto the first bit of negative propaganda that was fed to you? Cuz the hook suck deep, in that case.  I'm playing your game here...you like to ask a lot of questions that you don't take the time to look up...this is "fun" isn't it.

Lets continue.

The word 'illegal' if used in certain ways is racist. But lets move beyond that, its the wrong usage and you should be interested in that. There are several groups you are referring to and they should have different labels. Some are illegal immigrants, they are people and should be thought of as such. The other are asylum seeking immigrants or to use another word refugees. If you cared, which it seems as though you don't, you would work to differentiate them in your vernacular. If for no other reason than to not sound, at best ignorant, or at worst, racist.   How is calling someone who comes into our country "illegal" racist or ignorant??  It is literally what they are if they don't come here and do what is expected in terms of being vetted and let into the country.  How is this concept so hard to understand and why are you searching for the boogeyman in it??  Is it more racists to try and twist a word into being racist versus using a word as it's literal meaning?

I won't repeat the words of bigot/president but they were because 45 is a bigot and a racist. We all heard they utter the nickname of the virus. They said it multiple times. It is racist. No proof is required.  Again, you won't repeat what he said because you don't have any examples of actual racist things he said other than what he called the virus.  How have virus' been described in the past...that's right by where they were originated at...are all of those now racist??  Give me a break.  Does the Trump say stupid things...absolutely...would never defend him on those things, but to say he is a bigot and racist is, as you describe it, is "ignorant at best".

'Illegal' until vetted: answered above. 

'Unempathetic' without vetting first: It is. Analogy: if your neighbor's house is on fire you don't quibble about the cost of your garden hose. We trust them that they feel they were/are in danger. That's what friends do. Does it turn out not to be the case sometimes? Yes. But to lump everyone together as 'illegals' is to quote you, 'unempathetic'  Have no idea how your analogy relates to anything.  People that come here illegally are illegals...period...that has nothing to do with being empathetic to those trying to come here.  I am empathetic to those people when they follow the law and do things the way they are supposed to in order to come here. 

Feel bad because of a word: I haven't. Nor should I need to considering my response above. I'm sure they don't care. But conversing with someone that purports to take the topic seriously. You should be interested in communicating more effectively, your points. Proper, or at least agreed upon, nomenclature would help.   This sentence says it all "I'm sure they don't care."  My point is made...the rest is just babble.

'Quasi-isolationist': is what America First means. It was coined before ww2 when we didn't want to stop Germany from taking over Europe. A group was started to try to influence the country to stay out of ww2. Not a great slogan or opinion to resurrect. But that's par for the course of a party with no new ideas.   LOL...then why did you resurrect it??

Wrong with America First: see above. 

Make America First: Watch the Newroom. We are not first. Have never been first. I personally don't want us to be first. America is first at just three things: incarcerated prisoners per capita, number of adults who believe angels are real, and defense spending.  So you don't want to make America better...got it.

Immigration makes/made America a great country: sure, I can get behind that. Those immigrants were rarely treated/received well. Likely do to similar conversations happening at the time of their arrivals: Irish, Italian, Polish, German, Asian, Latin, African. People here, didn't want them because they were convinced that the new people would 'steal' what they had to fight for. Does that ever really happen? No.   And your point is??  Thanks for repeating history...our history is what it is and clearly wasn't the best at times.  We learn from it and try and do better...better than most counties in that regard.  So yes immigration is one of the things that has and does make America a great country...I am for immigrants doing it legally.

45 was against people coming here legally. Lots of people that worked in the administration only wanted certain people to be allowed to come here. That's racist. On here, seeing as you conflate the legal entry process with the illegal entry process, either on accident or on purpose, you do.  Since I know you can't provide actual evidence, this is absolutely false and pretty much discredits a lot of the things you say.  It is hyperbole, and has no basis in facts or reality.  Like I said I don't like the guy but this is utter nonsense. 

Firstly, borders are imaginary lines. There are no borders. Help people make a better life. We do that, we all win.   LOL..."imaginary lines" 

'Fragile mind': honestly, is this your way of dismissing my opinions and critiques of your behavior so you don't have to take them seriously? Using 'illegals' in the way that you have done in the past is a way of Otherizing people. This is the thing you may be looking for as to what makes us the best. Because the United States is great at otherizing people. We did it with Native Americans to rationalize stealing their land for gold, oil, ore, or just the land for the land's sake. The Irish when they came over during a famine. Italians when they came over.  Africans, when they... really ever since they were brought here or came over. We make enemies from 'different' people really well. Its dangerous and wrong and your rhetoric only adds to it. So either out of ignorance or on purpose you are leading to the endangerment of a group of people because you don't care enough to look at them as humans first. If the opposite of that is a 'fragile mind'. SIGN. ME. UP!   Asking if you have a fragile mind and then you reply with this, which clearly shows you do.  It's okay...glad you admit it...that is the first step.

That was fun. We should do it more often.   

If you've read this far, I challenge you to answer all of my questions that you decided not to with your first response. I look forward to reading them or your (less than)clever way of dodging the opportunity.  

 

You sure don't know the definition of concise do you?  Responses above in red.

[ThreePointTakedown]

12 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

You sure don't know the definition of concise do you?  Responses above in red.

Questions on asylum, first, yes, if they claim asylum they have arrived here LEGALLY. Does 'legal' mean 'citizen'? No. The legal process has begun so they are allowed to stay if they meet certain criteria and meet certain benchmarks. Wouldn't they be "un-legal" until they are determined to infact be "refugees"??  Is it the legal process? Yes. As I said before. You trying to rationalize it to keep using the term or avoid using a more appropriate term leads me to believe you don't want to for some reason. What reason could that be? Percentage: I can't seem to find a solid number but I did find that 40% of asylum seekers have been granted entry out of 700,000 cases since 2000. Which is not many, if we are to think millions upon millions have entered illegally in just the last few years. Which is also a stat I have not found a credible source for. Have you?  I have not found a number either...my point was it appears as an easy way out to come here by just simply claiming asylum.  I never claimed millions and millions have entered here illegally.  I claim that to many come here illegally.

There is a vetting process. Its filing for asylum. That is the process.  Of course there is....do you know the process?

Disproven or not proven enough. Supposedly about 60% of the time it can. 

These questions seem to highlight a lack of preparedness on your part. Did you even try looking for information on this topic or did you just latch onto the first bit of negative propaganda that was fed to you? Cuz the hook suck deep, in that case.  I'm playing your game here...you like to ask a lot of questions that you don't take the time to look up...this is "fun" isn't it.

Lets continue.

The word 'illegal' if used in certain ways is racist. But lets move beyond that, its the wrong usage and you should be interested in that. There are several groups you are referring to and they should have different labels. Some are illegal immigrants, they are people and should be thought of as such. The other are asylum seeking immigrants or to use another word refugees. If you cared, which it seems as though you don't, you would work to differentiate them in your vernacular. If for no other reason than to not sound, at best ignorant, or at worst, racist.   How is calling someone who comes into our country "illegal" racist or ignorant??  It is literally what they are if they don't come here and do what is expected in terms of being vetted and let into the country.  How is this concept so hard to understand and why are you searching for the boogeyman in it??  Is it more racists to try and twist a word into being racist versus using a word as it's literal meaning? I've just explained it to you how you are incorrect. Some arrive and make there way through the legal process. But you still referr to them all with the same term. That is ignorant. If its racist is a little more complicated. Only you can answer that. But the more you use the wrong term on purpose, lends credence to the level of racism of you using it. 

I won't repeat the words of bigot/president but they were because 45 is a bigot and a racist. We all heard they utter the nickname of the virus. They said it multiple times. It is racist. No proof is required.  Again, you won't repeat what he said because you don't have any examplesthat logic doesn't follow, please explain? THE RACIST NAME(npr article) of actual racist things he said other than what he called the virus.  How have virus' been described in the past...that's right by where they were originated at...are all of those now racist??  Give me a break.  Does the Trump say stupid things...absolutely...would never defend him on those things, but to say he is a bigot and racist is, as you describe it, is "ignorant at best".

'Illegal' until vetted: answered above. 

'Unempathetic' without vetting first: It is. Analogy: if your neighbor's house is on fire you don't quibble about the cost of your garden hose. We trust them that they feel they were/are in danger. That's what friends do. Does it turn out not to be the case sometimes? Yes. But to lump everyone together as 'illegals' is to quote you, 'unempathetic'  Have no idea how your analogy relates to anything.  People that come here illegally are illegals...period...that has nothing to do with being empathetic to those trying to come here.  I am empathetic to those people when they follow the law and do things the way they are supposed to in order to come here. Are they people? Are they human? 

Feel bad because of a word: I haven't. Nor should I need to considering my response above. I'm sure they don't care. But conversing with someone that purports to take the topic seriously. You should be interested in communicating more effectively, your points. Proper, or at least agreed upon, nomenclature would help.   This sentence says it all "I'm sure they don't care."  My point is made...the rest is just babble. What I read from this is, "i am wrong, I know I'm wrong, its a degrading term to people whose feelings I don't care about, but I'll keep saying it anyway because no one tells me what to do.' You're just a sad person, if that is the case. 

'Quasi-isolationist': is what America First means. It was coined before ww2 when we didn't want to stop Germany from taking over Europe. A group was started to try to influence the country to stay out of ww2. Not a great slogan or opinion to resurrect. But that's par for the course of a party with no new ideas.   LOL...then why did you resurrect it?? Sorry, conservatives and 45 specifically brought it back recently. I'm just reminding you how harmful it has been in the past. Considering the topic we are conversing about, it seems as if they are interested in doing the same things that happened preWW2. Which were cruel and wrong because they were racist. Woodrow Wilson, who coined the phrase, was a racist. Probably shouldn't make things so easy. 

Wrong with America First: see above. 

Make America First: Watch the Newroom. We are not first. Have never been first. I personally don't want us to be first. America is first at just three things: incarcerated prisoners per capita, number of adults who believe angels are real, and defense spending.  So you don't want to make America better...got it. Seeing as those words never appeared in this paragraph. Was your incorrect interpretation based on your maliciousness or stupidity? 

Hanlon's razor is an adage or rule of thumb that states:^[1]

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

Immigration makes/made America a great country: sure, I can get behind that. Those immigrants were rarely treated/received well. Likely do to similar conversations happening at the time of their arrivals: Irish, Italian, Polish, German, Asian, Latin, African. People here, didn't want them because they were convinced that the new people would 'steal' what they had to fight for. Does that ever really happen? No.   And your point is??  Thanks for repeating history...our history is what it is and clearly wasn't the best at times.  We learn from it and try and do better...better than most counties in that regard.  So yes immigration is one of the things that has and does make America a great country...I am for immigrants doing it legally. Point: you are engaging in xenophobic rhetoric that your 'legal' immigrant relatives had to deal with when they came to this country. Which probably but almost definitely made their lives harder and more dangerous. 

45 was against people coming here legally. Lots of people that worked in the administration only wanted certain people to be allowed to come here. That's racist. On here, seeing as you conflate the legal entry process with the illegal entry process, either on accident or on purpose, you do.  Since I know you can't provide actual evidence, this is absolutely false and pretty much discredits a lot of the things you say.  It is hyperbole, and has no basis in facts or reality.  Like I said I don't like the guy but this is utter nonsense. 45 Travel ban. And Steven Miller. 

Firstly, borders are imaginary lines. There are no borders. Help people make a better life. We do that, we all win.   LOL..."imaginary lines" Are borders permanent? 

'Fragile mind': honestly, is this your way of dismissing my opinions and critiques of your behavior so you don't have to take them seriously? Using 'illegals' in the way that you have done in the past is a way of Otherizing people. This is the thing you may be looking for as to what makes us the best. Because the United States is great at otherizing people. We did it with Native Americans to rationalize stealing their land for gold, oil, ore, or just the land for the land's sake. The Irish when they came over during a famine. Italians when they came over.  Africans, when they... really ever since they were brought here or came over. We make enemies from 'different' people really well. Its dangerous and wrong and your rhetoric only adds to it. So either out of ignorance or on purpose you are leading to the endangerment of a group of people because you don't care enough to look at them as humans first. If the opposite of that is a 'fragile mind'. SIGN. ME. UP!   Asking if you have a fragile mind and then you reply with this, which clearly shows you do.  It's okay...glad you admit it...that is the first step. You're a horrible human being. But you're still a human being. I feel sorry for you and I cannot share your feelings about this situation. So I have a hard time feeling empathetic with you. I hope you change your opinions. Putting down the need to be so toxic would be a great first step. I'm happy, over joyed, that you think I am fragile minded because of these opinions. Makes me feel better and more secure that I am on the right side of history. 

That was fun. We should do it more often.   

If you've read this far, I challenge you to answer all of my questions that you decided not to with your first response. I look forward to reading them or your (less than)clever way of dodging the opportunity.  Take a second or third swing at this one too .

[red viking]

While stricter immigration policy enforcement is something that's generally needed, now is NOT the time to start deporting undocumented workers. 

Unemployment is still extremely low so any deportation will merely cause more inflation. Wait for unemployment to go up before doing this, or even spending crazy money on a wall. 

[JimmyBT]

Answer the question.  Or cry to the mods. Bahahahahahha

[Bigbrog]

@ThreePointTakedown Clearly you don't like playing your own game.  I answered all your questions and all you do is find reason for them to be "ignorant" or "racist"....funny part is I don't care if you do or don't.  If someone comes here illegally they are an illegal immigrant...period.  That is not racist...period.  By the way please point out where II ever said they should be called illegal immigrants after they have come here legally??  You can't!  Just like you can't show me any proof that Trump is in fact a bigot or racist...nor where he has indicated he doesn't want any immigration.  You can't! 

Your schtick of babbling incoherently and calling everything you disagree with racist or ignorant is tiresome and worthless.  Babble away...I am done playing your stupid game.

[red viking]

29 minutes ago, JimmyBT said:

Answer the question.  Or cry to the mods. Bahahahahahha

You may want to make it clear who you're talking to

 

[JimmyBT]

35 minutes ago, red viking said:

You may want to make it clear who you're talking to

 

No need. The whiney little biatch knows.  

[ThreePointTakedown]

33 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

@ThreePointTakedown Clearly you don't like playing your own game.  I answered all your questions and all you do is find reason for them to be "ignorant" or "racist"....funny part is I don't care if you do or don't.  If someone comes here illegally they are an illegal immigrant...period.  That is not racist...period.  By the way please point out where II ever said they should be called illegal immigrants after they have come here legally??  You can't!  Just like you can't show me any proof that Trump is in fact a bigot or racist...nor where he has indicated he doesn't want any immigration.  You can't! 

Your schtick of babbling incoherently and calling everything you disagree with racist or ignorant is tiresome and worthless.  Babble away...I am done playing your stupid game.

That 45 sued for being a bigot and a racist in the 70's. 

You consistently refused to call people going through the LEGAL asylum process as legal or non'illegal' so that you didn't say it doesn't mean you didn't infer it. You are still ignorant and I still feel sorry for you. But you can go ahead and work to convince yourself that you aren't. Which I imagine is the whole point of this exercise. 

Where were your answers from the first post that you didn't answer? 

Can someone help this person define 'travel ban' and what that might entail for people trying to immigrate through those means. Malicious or stupid? 

Nope just you, your ideas, and your rationalizations.