Saturday, May 18, 2019

Trump the Bully (Immigration Edition)

Stephen Miller 
President Trump told his aides during a recent Oval Office meeting that immigration-hating Trump adviser Stephen Miller was in charge of all immigration and border-related issues in the White House, reports CNN.

The Washington Post reports:

At Miller’s urging, Trump last month ousted DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and the previous acting director of ICE, Ronald Vitiello, along with other top officials. Miller has argued to the president that he needs a different team, one that will be more aggressive in carrying out his agenda — and Miller has frequently argued in meetings about immigration that others are seeking to undercut the president.

Before their departure, Nielsen and Vitiello had challenged a plan devised by Miller and Albence to carry out mass arrests of migrant parents and children eligible for deportation in 10 U.S. cities.f migrants.
Miller is an economic illiterate when it comes to the economics of immigration.

I have discussed the topic here:

 

 -RW

23 comments:

  1. What we have now is not immigration, it is an invasion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, it is not. Your paranoid mind may be telling you that.

      Delete
    2. Yeah, who am I gonna believe, you or my lyin' eyes, right? Tell that to the people of Minnesota who have had half of Somalia dropped on them.

      Delete
    3. You should take your Thorazine and then look at the world because you're right now suffering from a series of hallucinations that must be quite frightening.

      I do find your statement about Somali refugees dropped in Minnesota laughable, because it means you see no difference between immigrants, who are invited in by a Market that beckons them, and refugee importation, which is something the government does regardless of the Market. You then conflate the two and talk about it as if it were one single phenomenon, excepting the rest of people to be clueless or stupid. Maybe your Fellowship of the Melanin-deficient are that gullible, but don't presume to think that it is the same with the rest of humanity.

      Delete
    4. Robeet, I see what you mean, and agree.

      OM, the distinction between how the Somalis got to Minnesota may be irrelevant. The effect on nations (which is synonymous with ethnicities) is all the same.

      Delete
    5. Hello, Sherlock,

      It is indeed relevant, Sherlock, because it is one thing to decide to migrate and quite another to be taken from a refugee camo and flown to the United States even if willingly. One is an individual choice followed by individual action. The other is not. This effect on ethnicities you allude to cannot be the same as you suggest because the immigrant does not simply parachute over the territory. That's not how immigration works at all. YOU may harbor a paranoid fantasy to the contrary but that's your problem.

      Delete
    6. I think we are speaking different languages, and I'm trying to bridge that gap. You continue to mock those that disagree with you, which is unfortunate.

      Delete
    7. Hello, Sherlock,

      No, I am speaking English. You're speaking Equivocate Until I Die. That's all. You have no interest in bridging any gap but to continue to confuse people who willingly and individually come to this country to improve their lot (to work, to trade) and those who are brought over by the State, ostensibly for humanitarian reasons. You want to paint them all with the same brush presumably because of the effect they have on a few bigots who fancy themselves belonging to an "ethnicity", or "nation", as you put it.

      And I don't mock those who disagree with me. I mock those who rely on mental gymnastics to say all cars and carriages are "things with wheels that run over people", like you're doing, like Robert is doing. At least I know where Robert is coming from - he's a white supremacist - but you seem to hide behind a veneer of reasonableness. I can tell you right now, it is not going to work.

      Delete
    8. @Sherlock,

      It is very fashionable these days to hate White People, and OldMexican has just jumped on the bandwagon. For all I know OM is a guilt ridden self hating White person. There is no shortage of those. Before he was banned from the internet, Chateay Heartist had an excellent article about White Separatism and why it is so villified, while Black Supremacists (BLM) and Latino Supremacists (La Raza) are celebrated. His premise is that Whites are the host that all the parasites feed off of. The threat of the host shaking off the parasites is extremely threatening.

      Delete
    9. Hello, Robert what?

      It may be fashionable for some to hate White people but what is clear is that it has become very fashionable for many to hate non-White people for no other reason than they lack melanin. I haven't jumped into anybody's bandwagon and I reject your claim for being mostly the result of your projection. By the way, the Black Lives Matter movement is not a black supremacist movement. That's a lie. I don't agree with their politics but that doesn't mean they have a legitimate argument against an authority with an affinity to execute black Americans for no other crime except contempt of cop. If this guy Chateay Heartist didn't see that, is because he's a State-lovin' authoritarian.

      For your information, the reason why White "Separatism" (i.e. code for Supremacy) is vilified is not because it is a host shaking its parasites, whatever that is supposed to mean. It is vilified because it possesses a long pedigree of murder and terror.

      Delete
  2. I hope Trump kicks out a lot of them and sends them back home. We need further heavy restrictions on legal immigration as well. The only ones who should be considered for legal status are those with a liberty minded mindset and preferably a White European. Those from Africa or Central America offer nothing to this country and need to stay where they are. If they are so great to have, why are the countries they come from such dysfunctional poopholes? And why won't RW move there instead for all that 'cheap labor'?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello, Lab Manager,

      Trump is not going to 'kick out' and send home anyone.

      Delete
    2. @OldMexican,
      There I have to agree with you. Trump is all talk and little or no action

      Delete
  3. Hello, Robert,

    >> "Miller is an economic illiterate when it comes to the economics of immigration." <<

    So too are the two knuckleheads who wasted no time to put into words their racialist fantasies above. So too are those who think the country would be better off with a negative population growth rate, wheter they see this from the anti-human side on the authoritarian left or the bigoted, racist side on the authoritarian right.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @OldMexican,
      The days when America was 90% white will never return. But why not break up the United States into ethno States, like the White Separatists want? Since everyone hates Whites so much that should be welcomed, right?

      Delete
    2. Hello, Robert what?

      Who is calling for the breakup of the States into ethno States, besides white supremacists and some black supremacists? When you ask "why not", you could be cynical or you could be serious, but no one else is calling for the separation of the races except for your friends in the loony white supremacist fringe.

      Delete
  4. You lost me at free market. There is no such thing in this country so the rest of your comment RW is pie in the sky. Its been decades since there was one anywhere here.

    Its the Elephant in the room. You have a crony oligarchy facilitating a monopoly driven economy that makes unchecked Immigration have a very significant negative impact on the American society as a whole. As the general race to poverty continues for all but the top 10% means the competition for resources of all kinds will worsen with real opportunity to contribute to the whole.

    Its nice to talk in ideal terms but we are far from that position and unchecked immigration is for all intents and purposes a genuine invasion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello, shegottawideload,

      To say "there's no such thing as a free market" is to say that there's no such thing as a perfect libertarian society therefore we can't have liberty. Of course there is a market that is as free as it can possibly be; the fact that the market suffers from a series of interventions by the State is not a justification or argument to make the market even LESS free by restricting the flow of capital and labor. You would be prescribing killing the patient to stop the disease, so to speak.

      Where is this "negative impact on the American society as a whole" that you allude to? Where's your evidence for this, besides paranoid fantasies peddled by bigots?

      Delete
  5. Libertarian code allows for these invaders to enter because only private property owners may call the invaders trespassers. And since the invaders are not on private property, then libertarians may not initiate force to keep them out. But the invaders are third-worlders who are anti freedom and will eventually vote to destroy what Western civilization has accomplished. Therefore libertarian code doesn't work and we must not be libertarians.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello, so-called "Freedom" Mom,

      You use the term "libertarian code" which implies there's a code and not a principle. That tells me that you haven't the slightest clue of what libertarianism means or is about.

      To begin with, there's no code. There's a principle, the Non Aggression Principle, which implies that all transactions between human beings must be of a voluntary nature. By making the call not to be libertarian, you're ipso facto implying transactions should not be voluntary, which makes your tepid defense of private ownership ironic. I would have to surmise that you only regard private ownership as a right only reserved to exclusionists and racists and not for those who want to invite immigrants in and engage with them in peaceful trade.

      The rest of your diatribe is just the usual bigoted and chauvinist pap pushed by white supremacists through many channels. Immigrants are not invaders; they're being invited in by a Market that beckons them. Perhaps you're anti-Market, too, which would not surprise me considering the frank hostility that many Trumpistas have expressed towards the free Market.

      Delete
  6. Anyone who is afraid of immigrants is either a schmuck or a pussy. Maybe both.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My guess is you live in an all or mostly White gated community where you are shielded from the consequences of the policies you champion.

      Delete