Nothing Says White Privilege Like A Good Protest

These are interesting, unprecedented times, to be sure. After all, who could have guessed that someday we’d have a president who would put a temporary travel ban on Middle Easterners? Well, I mean other than that time that Obama did it. This president specifically put a ban on seven Muslim countries—unthinkable. Hold on, I forgot about that time that Obama identified those same countries when he removed them from the Visa Waiver Program. But this president wants to indiscriminately prevent all people from an hispanic country from coming here. What? Obama did that, too? Damn. At least he didn’t strand and detain people at the airport…oh, FFS, let’s just move on.

No, the real story here is the sheer volume of protests. I mean, for real. Dude’s been president for, like, a week, and I’m guessing that some people have just been bouncing from protest to protest. And there’s been something interesting about the protests, something that I couldn’t quite put my finger on until today.

“I have learned something this morning,” my friend wrote to me via Facebook Messenger early today. “White people love to protest.”

You know what? He’s right! I spent the day watching various news reports on CNN, Fox, and NBC, and I couldn’t find any image of a protest that was comprised of less than 95% white people (unless it was a staged photo with POC propped up behind the Democrat of your choice—although even that went waaaaay wrong a couple of times). As my friend said, it’s easy to go hold a sign at an airport. Marching, chanting, holding hands—none of that actually costs you anything.

But what about volunteering with an organization that houses refugees? or putting together meal packages at a food bank? or cooking food for families at the Ronald McDonald house? or building a Habitat for Humanity? (Four things that your author has actually done, by the way.) Nah. That might require effort. And there won’t be any news cameras present, or celebrities, or live streaming.

No, it’s easy to take the Saturday and Sunday afternoon that you have off (because you don’t work a menial/retail job that would require you to be present) and go hold a sign at the airport (making it harder for those of us who travel for a living and make the country actually run) because you’ll have so much to talk about at the water cooler on Monday. In other words, the people who are ensuring that you have a latte to drink before your protest or shuttle you to the protest in your Uber or serve you a delicious cocktail at the new hip bar in town have better things to do.

And, of course, in the course of your daily life you won’t run into a single refugee. Let me say that again. You can let every single refugee you want into this country because you’ll never. meet. one. of. them. You can feel safe in knowing that they’ll be stacked ten at a time into housing far away from you, using public transportation that you’ll never use, stressing the resources of social programs that you’ll never need, taking up tax dollars that you’ll use an exemption to avoid.

You, Mr. and Ms. Protester, are the epitome of White Privilege. You don’t even have any idea what an influx of Somalian refugees can do to a neighborhood, or a community, or a university. You haven’t been sexually assaulted. You don’t know what the forcing of 38,000 people into a city who won’t assimilate does to the people who live there. Nope, you’ll just keep on keeping on, resting safely in the knowledge that admitting one of these refugees (whatever they are) won’t affect your life one iota.

So if you give a shit about refugees, why don’t you go work in one of the established safe zones? Why don’t you make a donation to a cause that actually makes a difference instead of sharing your $10 ACLU donation to Facebook the moment you finish clicking “submit?”

Nah. Better to hold a sign. After all, people who hold signs go on to…hold many things.

156 Replies to “Nothing Says White Privilege Like A Good Protest”

  1. Joe

    I wonder how many of these people are paid to protest? I keep on seeing articles of charter busses showing up and a bunch of protesters show up all of a sudden flash mob style.

    Reply
      • Ken

        Odd, I didn’t realize ABC News had updated their website from abcnews.com (which resolves to abcnews.go.com) to abcnews.com.CO

        Also, odd that ABC news changed their logo on this “new” totally legit website.

        Fake news site man.

        Reply
        • rwb

          Congratulations on figuring out that brain buster! Your personalized Big Mouth Billy Bass will be arriving in 6-8 weeks.

          Reply
          • Ken

            Sweet!

            (I really couldn’t tell if you were being legit or factious with that URL vs. the word “TROOTH”.)

            Its frightening the amount of people that think those sites are really.

    • rambo furum

      I’d say at least half, but it may be more.

      The existence of the unpaid useful idiots, beyond vainglorious virtue signalling, is also explained by the fact that 1960s hippies have been canonized as being the most righteous rebelious influential anticomformist blah blah ever, and not just slacker stoner hedonists. Liberalism of the last century has largely been people chasing the ’60s dragon and hoping to recreate that time of blah blah social change. Despite there being no real problems that warrant it…that liberals care about.

      Reply
      • rwb

        I would love to know how one exposes themselves to the opportunity to collect a check for protesting from one of Mr. Soros’s organizations, because I have some vacation time and can hold a sign for hours, and it sure seems easier than renting a bus and start a Facebook group.

        Reply
  2. TheMook

    Spot on.

    This one kind of reads out like the bathhouse fight in Eastern Promises.

    I like it. The post, Not the nude dude brawl.

    Reply
  3. phr3dly

    Puzzling. I know a great many people who both protest and volunteer at food banks, and build at habitat for humanity. When I’ve volunteered at the food bank, my fellow volunteers were definitely of the eat organic/buy local/protest variety.

    I googled “women’s march 2017” and looked at the images. There were many black women, many hispanic women, and other non-caucasion. I don’t know if the samples were representative of the actual population, because I am at work and don’t have time to count.

    Here’s one:
    https://assets.dnainfo.com/photo/2017/1/1485033577-288737/extralarge.jpg

    And another:
    https://tbmwomenintheworld.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/rtx2pdge.jpg?w=1280

    And another:
    https://assets.dnainfo.com/photo/2016/11/1478985845-281837/larger.jpg

    That said, there is a definitely preponderance of white men among the group of people in need of a safe place at the mere thought of others protesting.

    Reply
    • 1A

      Food banks? How scary! I think the author probably meant working at a soup kitchen (or whatever they might be called today)–you know, the place where you have to actually see, serve, and wait on the poor, by the hundreds!

      White men need a safe place? If that’s where they allow freedom of conscience, thought, speech, etc., let me in! (‘Ya know, American ideals..things my fathers fought for).

      P.S. It’s C-a-u-c-a-s-i-a-n.

      Reply
        • 1A

          Did you have an argument? The point still stands: good luck finding a leftist working in a soup kitchen. I volunteer at one and those who volunteer are: conservative Christians! You WILL NOT see any liberal groups come in, not one!

          Reply
          • 1A

            @VoGo – “Babtist”? Really? Are you a self-hating former hillbilly trying to prove yourself in the city? I knew it! So embarrassed of where you come from, you lash out at others with the similar views you’re trying to wash yourself of! Love it!
            P.S. To all the hillbillies out there, I used that term to espouse the classism VoGo is trying to eschew. I’m from the country and love everything about it 🙂

          • 1A

            @VoGo
            @Harry
            So you equate “hillbilly” with only being from the South? Nice stereotype, BIGOT!
            By the way, you’re only 100 miles from “the South” (not that I give a shit where you’re from)–so yeah, tell me where I’m wrong on this. Your shit is laughable really.
            100 miles from West Virginia—I thought you’d be a little less douchey!

  4. VoGo

    Values. That’s what this comes down to. People are protesting to exercise and support what they see as American values. They view this nation as being founded by immigrants supporting freedom of religion. And they are exercise their rights to assembly and free speech.

    Are most white? Probably. I didn’t count. I’m not 100% sure what white means. Do they all volunteer to help refugees? Of course not. But some do. Some volunteer or contribute to other causes. And some not at all. Like any crowd.

    You make a good point that we should ensure that refugees (if we ever take any more) and immigrants should be well supported to ensure that they don’t mess up local neighborhoods. There are ways to do that. Canada seems to have figured it out – at least better than we have.

    Regardless, a lot of people saw an executive order which they interpreted to be unlawful and unAmerican, and they took action. As it turns out, Trumps own attorney general will not defend the order, out of concern that it is not lawful. Which I think tells you something.

    Reply
    • Disinterested-Observer

      “Canada seems to have figured it out”

      It is my understanding, I could be wrong, that Canada only takes in worthwhile immigrants.

      Reply
      • VoGo

        ‘Worthwhile’ is one description. From what I understand, it’s a little more nuanced. The US tends to favor immigration by relation, whereas Canada favors economic potential.
        I’ve worked with a ton of high earning people in the US who are immigrants and have been amazed by the Byzantine labyrinth they have to negotiate, simply to contribute to our economy and pay taxes.

        Reply
        • Mike

          I assume you mean the current acting AG who was an Obama appointment. Hardly a surprise that she wouldn`t defend the order.
          Also interesting that you make no counter argument to the point that Obama singled out these 7 countries again or the issues that come from admitting large numbers of migrants/refugees.

          Reply
          • phr3dly

            Obama removed these seven countries from a program that provided reciprocal travel without Visas. This is in no way comparable to President Trump’s executive order.

            Trying to conflate the two is an intentional deception by the Trump administration.

          • Disinterested-Observer

            “This is in no way comparable to President Trump’s executive order.

            Trying to conflate the two is an intentional deception by the Trump administration.”

            Conflating 7 countries with the whole 1.x billion population of Muslims is an intentional deception by the mainstream media. Other than trying to spin a correlation with Trump business interests because Pakistan and Saudi Arabia were (wrongly) excluded from the order, there are a bunch of middle eastern and north African countries not included, as well as Brunei and the Philippines.

          • Bark M Post author

            Dude, are you high?

            “Sally Quillian Yates (born August 20, 1960) is an American lawyer. She served as a United States Attorney and later United States Deputy Attorney General, having been appointed to both positions by President Barack Obama. She served as Acting United States Attorney General from January 20, 2017 until her dismissal by President Donald Trump on January 30, 2017, following her decision ordering the Justice Department to not defend Trump’s immigration related executive order in court.”

            Get your facts correct, please.

          • CJinSD

            I must admit I’m guilty of scrolling rapidly through all the sane comments in order to see how the first SJW would prostrate themself in an effort to dissemble their untenable hypocrisy. It was all that I’d hoped it would be.

          • VoGo

            Bark,
            Sally Yates did indeed work as deputy AG in the Obama administration. But upon his inauguration, Trump appointed her as his acting AG. Trump appointed her because he spent November and December on twitter and getting his picture taken with Mitt Romney, rather than doing the hard work of selecting and preparing an AG in time to be vetted by the Senate.

            I have my facts straight. Obama is gone. You need a new scapegoat.

          • Bark M Post author

            That doesn’t make her a “Trump appointee.” She’s a holdover from the previous administration. And if your senators would stop crying wolf about everybody being a racist, we’d already have an AG.

            And if you really think Obama is gone, you haven’t been paying attention. He might have moved out of the White House, but both his actions and his new place of residence indicate he has no plans to leave the spotlight.

          • VoGo

            So Trump isn’t responsible for appointing his AG? That’s one form of leadership, I suppose.

            Obama is staying in DC to support his younger daughter so she can finish HS at the same school. It’s just a happy coincidence that his presence feeds the conspiracy theories of those who thrive on such things.

          • Bark M Post author

            Sure. But Melania and Barron staying in NYC so he can finish school is definitely NOT OKAY.

            Sessions should have already been confirmed.

          • VoGo

            I note that Trump’s nominee for AG has such a strong history of racist remarks that his own party, which controls the Senate, has deferred approval.

            It’s great to see your interest in little Barron Trump’s education. Given your history of good works – which you were kind enough to share above – perhaps you could volunteer as a tutor for him!

          • Bark M Post author

            That clearly overshadows the part where he sued to desegregate schools or fought for the death penalty for Klansmen.

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

            Yeah… he made a joke about the Klan at the same time that he was trying to get them the death penalty. Put it through the media machine, and he comes out the other end as a Klansman.

            Atticus Finch couldn’t get the AG position nowadays; look at all the raysiss things he said!

      • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

        When I worked for LeftLane, we did a lot of video shoots in “new Canadian” neighborhoods.

        Many of them were fundamentally indistinguishable from the slums of Calcutta.

        There was human waste on the street, unattended toddlers, that sort of thing.

        Reply
        • Kevin Jaeger

          Quite true. I would say that Canada has, on balance, integrated immigrants better than many other western countries and we generally don’t have an uncontrolled population of illegals. When Mexicans overstay their visas in Canada we deport them, so I take it Vogo endorses this policy.

          But we certainly have areas – mostly refugees, not immigrants that we’ve selected, that are total failures to integrate or economically develop. Somalis are one group, but there are others.

          America certainly could learn some things from Canada’s policies but it’s certainly not a utopia.

          Reply
          • VoGo

            I haven’t been to Calcutta, but I have watched a lot, a lot, a lot of Trailer Park Boys. I don’t think this qualifies me as an expert in Canadian immigration.

          • Mike

            Thanks Vogo for admitting your mistake in the acting AG – there are a lot of hangovers from a previous administration when you have 4000 positions to fill. That is normal.

          • VoGo

            Mike,
            I would expect that someone champing at the bit to ‘drain the swamp’ would be able to select an AG and get him confirmed by a Republican Senate by now. And if he failed to do that because he spent the previous 75 days on twitter and getting pictures of himself taken with Mitt Romney, then he would at least be able to appoint an acting AG who would do as he was told, rather than feel beholden to US law.

            There’s your apology. And by the way, it’s kind of creepy this compulsion of yours, this desperation to find error in my posts. Don’t you have something better to do?

          • Mike

            Vogo, what is creepy is you constantly posting on Mark and Jack’s post and being called out for it yesterday by one of the TTAC moderators. It seems like you spend a lot of your time on TTAC and here posting comments. I like you to admit you are wrong because you come across as smug and arrogant and make comments like “disrespect of the President only started in January 2009”!

    • Harry

      Sutton Fosters guest arc on Concords almost made me watch an episode of Bunheads.

      Although we should probably all boycott that show since he made such a sixist remark about her.

      Reply
  5. Bobby Ang

    Spot on. To add, the only reason there’s such a big anti trump movement especially from the white – even though he practically does what Obama did – is that Trump didn’t behave like how a white should behave. He didn’t carry himself in the ‘i-can-bomb-your-parents-to-pieces-yet-holding-your-hand-and-shed-a-tear-in-front-of-the-camera-style.

    Reply
    • Harry

      I disagree.

      I believe that is has been suggested here previously that much of what the clinton archipelago believes politically has been internalized by those people in the same way that religion used to be internalized by many of our forefathers(sixist again?). That is to say the their “beliefs” temporal take on the same aspects in their psychology that we traditionally associated with “beliefs” spiritual .

      When trying to place myself in the mindset of those people who are acting in a way that is otherwise baffling to me, or seemingly contrary, or at best neutral, to their own interests; I find using that lens when mentally modeling their behavior allows their action to make sense.

      To that end it is not important what Trump does, or how he presents it. He is the devil, and all his works are so tainted. It is their moral obligation to oppose him, or we are all damned.

      Further, it propose that for many of these people a tradition judeo-christian afterlife concept has been replaced by thinking about the world of their children and children’s children.as their afterlife.

      Their belief structure, particularly concerning the environment, entails that if we do not follow environmentalist precepts, the world will get hotter, dryer, storms pestilence famine, you know, Hell, for their descendants.

      These protest are “good works” to guard against it.

      Reply
  6. -Nate-Nate

    I was wondering when the anti protest comments would begin .
    .
    I too think they’re bullshit, not going to affect any change IMO .
    .
    A little news item the ‘ Liberal Media ‘ somehow neglected to mention : Rutland, Vt. is declining in population as so many little towns are so they decided to go look for Sryian reugees, Doctors, Plumbers, Accountants and so on ~ not the rabble rousing trash that appears to be the majority of these refugees, trump cancelled all their visas….
    .
    So who’s right here ?.
    .
    I see the crap occurring in France, Germany and my old School chum from the 1960’s who now lives in Canada tells me the refugees are a really mixed bag, few actually have any intention of assimilating much less WORKING for a living and wonder why should we allow their trash to come here, like the ‘murialistas’ from Cuba~ .remember them ? Castor emptied out his prisons, insane asylums and oh, yes ; a very few normal Cubanos were allowed to come to America, it took years to clean up that mess, i worked with some of them ,prostitutes who discovered skipping from job to job whilst doing nothing is a pretty good living in America, Land Of The Free .
    .
    -Nate

    Reply
  7. Rock36

    I’m sure I will be derided for being leftist, although I consider myself politically homeless, but in short I think all the issues you cited upfront ignore the context of those actions.

    – Obama’s Iraqi ban was in response to a discovered plot.
    – Limiting visa waivers is not objectively the same as a visa ban (even if temporary).
    – The change in Cuban visa policy was a response the changing nature of US foreign relations with Cuba, an attempted normalization of those relations, and an assessment (however misguided) that Cuban immigrants don’t qualify as refugees as they might have during the 1960s when Batista supporters sought asylum or when the nation was essentially a Latin American satellite of the Soviet Union.

    Now this isn’t a justification of protests against Trump, or a tacit support of those criticizing his actions, but let’s not attempt to appeal to hypocrisy or engage in a tu quoque fallacy. Especially when it is easy to separate the logic behind Obama’s actions and Trump’s actions whether or not you fundamentally agree with the former or the latter.

    If you want to make the case that Trump is being proactive in his visa bans vs. Obama being reactive in Iraqi refugee ban for security reasons, for example, then make that argument, because it makes sense. The false equivalencies, however, don’t hold much water.

    Reply
  8. Ronnie Schreiber

    I’m going to go out on a very short limb and assume that the woman holding the “Never Again” sign is with the man holding the “I’m a Jew I stand with you I will be your voice!!” (wait I thought white folks and honorary white folks like Jews were supposed to shut up and listen to POCs).

    She probably doesn’t know it but “Never Again” was first popularized by Rabbi Meir Kahane, may the Almighty avenge his blood, founder of the Jewish Defense League (and the funniest Jew since Lenny Bruce). It was the title of his manifesto, Never Again: A Program For Survival.

    It doesn’t surprise me that some liberal Jew would try and coopt a slogan about Jews and Israel trying to survive in a hostile world and apply it to folks some of whom very much want to kill Jews and wipe out the Jewish state.

    While there are reasons to criticize Pres. Trump’s executive order on entrants to the U.S. a couple dozen people having to wait in some airports isn’t the same as send the Jews on the US St. Louis back to their certain deaths in Nazi occupied Europe.

    It’s annoying when Jews who have had very little attachment to or affection for tradional Judaism suddenly use their Jewish status to validate their position. I didn’t like it when guys in Jews For Jesus would turn their bacon eating grandparents retroactively into orthodox Jews and I don’t like it when people who couldn’t tell you what the orignal Hebrew name for the book of Genesis is suddenly use their Jewish ethnicity as affirmation of their (usually leftwing) political position.

    The want to let Muslims live wherever they please but if you asked Mr. I’m A Jew and Ms. Never Again how they feel about Jews living in Judea and Samaria (aka The West Bank), well, those “settlements” are an obstacle to peace.

    Reply
    • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

      Ronnie,

      I doubt you’ve seen this but this season of Homeland has an American Muslim celebrating the death of Meir Kahane.

      Reply
      • VoGo

        Well, you know, Kahane WAS convicted for conspiracy to manufacture explosives, and his political party was banned by Israel for being racist and anti-democratic. So there’s that.

        Reply
        • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

          The guy who shot him was an avowed enemy of the United States.

          He should have been drawn and quartered in Times Square.

          Reply
        • Ronnie Schreiber

          Before we discuss Rabbi Kahane, please tell us how do you feel about freeing Abu Mumia Jamal.

          A young woman working for an impressario arranging cultural exchange tours with the Soviets was killed in a bombing. Though not directly involved, the Feds were able to tie Rabbi Kahane to the plot. I won’t defend everything the JDL did, but their actions allowed groups that the Jewish and U.S. establishments considered outside the pale, like the Student Struggle for Soviet Jewry, to be considered respectable. Revolutionaries making radicals look reasonable. It’s a technique perfected by the left.

          When I was in college in the early 1970s I participated in a protest outside Hill Auditorium in Ann Arbor, which was hosting a Russian orchestra as part of the aforementioned cultural exchange program. I remember well the anger on the faces of the pro-Soviet leftists attending the concert who berated us for bringing politics into art and culture.
          I’m sure that some of those same people today applaud artists and musicians for speaking out against President Trump.

          Every Jew who got out of the Soviet Union knew Rabbi Kahane’s name. They figured that if Pravda said bad things about him, he had to be good.

          Outside of political activism, Rabbi Kahane directly and indirectly brought a lot of Jews closer to Judaism and if you talk to rabbis involved in the Kiruv (Jewish outreach) movement off the record, they’ll tell you that Rabbi Kahane had a seminal role in their movement even if he was never tied to any of those yeshivas and seminaries. He was the only Jewish leader in America in the ’60s who told young Jews they should value their heritage. A Torah scholar of some note, he could deliver a coherent two hour lecture on halacha, Jewish law, without notes. Of course he had his opponent in the orthodox community, rabbis uncomfortable with trouble makers.

          On a personal level he was a kind, warm, and charming man. I saw him verbally disarm a hostile question from a Reform Jewess at a lecture, asking if there was a place in his Israel for her. He said to her, “Please move to Israel and vote against me.” I also saw him charm a reporter from the Detroit Free Press in an interview held in a friend’s kitchen. The published report the next day bore little resemblance to the actual interview. That was one of my first views into the biased sausage making of the left wing media.

          There was tremendous irony in the Kach politcal party being banned by other politcal parties on the grounds of being anti-democratic. The Israeli government also put Rabbi Kahane in jail under “administrative detention” without trial, a holdover from British occupation.

          One of the wisest things Rabbi Kahane said was that his leftist opponents in Israel feared him because they worried that if he came to power, he would act just like them.

          Funny thing is that leftist Jews can’t really distinguish between the extreme Jewish right, the folks in Kahane Chai and the ones who live in Kiryat Arba next to Hebron (not that they don’t have the right to do so) on one and and establishment Likud guys like Netanyahu. No enemies on the left and all boogeymen on the right.

          Like their obsession with the alt-right, as if any of them have read Richard Spencer’s reactionary pre-enlightenment positions at odds with foundational American concepts. Jack and Mark and Ronnie are “alt-right”, even if we have almost nothing in common with Spencer’s ideology, while black-garbed rioting vandals are described as “anti-fascist”.

          Reply
    • Harry

      A flip side of that is although I support the current action as right, the biggest moral niggle I have is a comparison to plight of pre-WWII Jews and their attempts to leave Germany and Nazi controlled areas.

      Or, later, the British impounding ships full of Jews heading for Palestine.

      I do not think are current actions are the equivalent or will have the same consequences, but I can also see that a policy of openly welcoming refugees can be a shade of “never again”

      Reply
  9. Dirty Dingus McGee

    I flew back to Atlanta Sunday. Coming out of the terminal, I saw a few folks milling about. When I got to the shuttle to take me back to the offsite parking, I asked the driver what was up? His face lit up as he told about the protest scheduled to start in about an hour. If I had been on a later flight, and got caught up in that mess, I suspect a couple of protesters might have “fell down” while they were trying to block me.
    Your right to protest does NOT trump my right to go on my way.

    Reply
  10. tmkreutzer

    One small, nitpicky detail – the countries that are a part of this debate were never part of the “visa waiver program.” The VWP includes a pretty exclusive list of countries – https://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/visit/visa-waiver-program.html

    What you are referring to are restrictions put in place by The Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 which excludes from the VWP Nationals of VWP countries who have traveled to or been present in Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, or Yemen on or after March 1, 2011 (with limited exceptions for travel for diplomatic or military purposes in the service of a VWP country) and also nationals of VWP countries who are also nationals (so, “dual nationals”) of Iran, Iraq, Sudan, or Syria.

    It sounds draconian, but what this really means is that the countries listed above, who would normally (for the purpose of tourism) be allowed to fly into the states and then apply for admission to our country after they land, must get a US visa at an embassy or a consulate prior coming to our country and apply for admission. It is not an outright exclusion.

    People from countries outside of the VWP program, by the way, must also get a visa prior to flying to the United States. That list includes countries like China, Mexico, Jamaica, India, etc. Thousands of people do this worldwide every day. It is an inconvenience, not an outright exclusion.

    One final issue – I think it is important to note that the legislation being referred to was introduced by Rep. Candice Miller (R-MI), passed the House of Representatives with a vote of 407-19 and became law as part of the year-end spending bill President Obama signed on December 18, 2015. It was not an executive order and despite the obvious support of both parties, was actually signed into law because it was added to a rider to a “must pass” piece of legislation.

    Reply
  11. Bigtruckseriesreview

    There are already laws on the books against illegal immigration.

    There is already precedent for immigration/travel bans.

    You are just seeing what happens when the Federal government DOESN’T ignore them.

    The Attorney General Yates just got the axe.

    These liberal government workers don’t seem to understand.

    #1 The president’s job is to execute the laws and to ensure national security is at its highest.

    YOU DON’T GET TO CHOOSE WHAT YOU WILL ENFORCE AND WON’T ENFORCE.

    You either comply or get fired.

    #2 National Security can mean anything from travel/immigration bans from “hostile” nations to the same bans on ebola carriers (CDC and FEMA involved).

    #3 Trump isn’t getting impeached. He has the Congress and he has the SCOTUS’ Scalia seat and will soon replace Ginsburg. No matter how many times Rachael Maddow and the nuts at MSNBC or CNN say it – he’s gonna be here for the next 1440 days (at least).

    As for these “protesters”… these “slacktavists” – they weren’t so vocal when Obama was deporting people and most of them have no idea who I.C.E is.

    It feels to me like these are hyperactive savages just looking for a fight and they actually think they have ground to stand on because of the rhetoric coming from MSNBC and CNN.

    America is a nation of Immigrants, but it’s also a nation of laws.

    A country with no borders is no country at all.

    What trump is doing is decoupling America from foreign dependence and slashing/burning regulations that strapped American businesses hands behind their backs. In 4 years, we shall judge his presidency – and judge it harshly. He’s a 1 term president in my mind. Once the hyperactive savages of Generation Y get their right to vote, they’ll elect a leftist so radical, they’ll make Bernie Sander’s brand of communism look like fiscal-conservatism.

    Trump’s got NOTHING to lose.

    As much as the left wants to call it a “muslim ban” – Trump is smart enough to link it to NATIONAL SECURITY rather than a “religious test”.

    I am sitting back laughing my ass off. Everyone who didn’t pay attention to government and how it works is watching really close now.

    This is more entertaining than going to the movies.

    Reply
    • Ken

      “In 4 years, we shall judge his presidency – and judge it harshly. He’s a 1 term president in my mind. Once the hyperactive savages of Generation Y get their right to vote, they’ll elect a leftist so radical, they’ll make Bernie Sander’s brand of communism look like fiscal-conservatism.”

      You absolutely have a point here. Swinging too far to the left to course correct is just as bad.

      Ever hear of Huey Long?

      http://thedollop.libsyn.com/215-huey-long

      Reply
    • Will

      Our media and protesters are a bunch of giant trolls?

      I’m not saying I agree or disagree with said policy, just asking the question.

      Reply
    • Ken

      Indeed. Its been a universal tactic to discredit the opposition by attacking the messenger and ignoring the message, since forever. Internet Trolls have simply adopted it.

      Reply
  12. 1A

    For the first time in my life, I was going to vote for the left if DJT didn’t run. I would have sorely regretted that vote judging by the despicable things I’ve seen and heard the past 3 months since Trump’s win. No, I will not align myself with these people!

    Reply
  13. Shrug

    Calling Obama’s action against Iraqis similar to the Trump ban on entire populations of seven different countries is flatly wrong. Obama’s action was far different in scope, application, organization, and reasoning.

    The Trump action effectively bans 130 MILLION people from entering the United States across 7 different majority-Muslim countries and has something dangerously close to a religious test in it (Giuliani called it a Muslim ban and Trump has said Christians would get preference). Obama’s action subjected only Iraq, and even then it wasn’t the entire country! The order applied only to refugees and applicants for Special Immigrant Visas. Entire populations of seven vast countries of mixed terror levels were not the target. Only a very specific, narrow group.

    Secondly, it was not a “ban” in a strict sense. It slowed down the refugee process significantly, but during the length of the order (6 months) there was not a single month where a refugee from Iraq did not enter the country.

    Also, Obama’s actions were under the auspices of specific threats. More specifically, two refugees in Kentucky were arrested in 2011. Worth noting, those are the only two arrests of out the roughly 130,000 Iraqi refugees and Special Immigrant Visa holders that have entered the country. Trump’s ban has come under no known threat or indication that this was being done at the behest of the intelligence community.

    Reply
  14. Jim

    As a guy who leads a safe and comfortable existence I can tell you that I have had plenty of interaction with refugees. In my city it started with the Hmong, then Bosnians, then Sudanese, then the Somalians. My interactions with them are not through volunteering, just everyday life. I fully concede that there are very real issues created when communities take on large refugee communities, but the only issue I have ever had is with female Somali drivers.

    I commute by bicycle when the weather is nice on a dedicated bicycle lane separated from regular traffic by painted lines, and I have learned when you see a ratted out minivan driven by a Somali woman, it is best to stop riding, dismount, and wait on the sidewalk until they are a least a block away. They have a habit merging into the bicycle lane whenever it is convenient without checking to see if it is occupied, stopping in the middle of busy traffic lanes for no discernable reason, and slowing down unpredictably when they are lost. In the most egregious example, I had to bunny hop a curb when one of these Somali driven minivans was traveling the wrong way down a bicycle lane while the driver was talking on her phone. I hope this improves with the next generation.

    The idiosyncrasies of Somali women are more than made up for by Somali men. For reasons I haven’t come to terms with artisanal coffee shops annoy me. The Somali men screw up the Starbucks business model by buying one small coffee in the morning and then occupying a disproportionate amount of the seating well into the afternoon while they discuss politics. I would love to deploy these guys across the country to do the same thing.

    Reply
  15. Ken

    1. The protesters are well within their 1st amendment rights to free peaceful assembly.

    2. The vast majority, if not all, are not paid. There truly is this much resentment to the Trump presidency. While “white slacktivism” may result in little direct change, it is a constant indirect reminder that there are large groups of the populous that are dissatisfied with the Presidency. The “mistake” of banning green card holders, looks more like a reaction to these protests (while saving face) than an actual reversal of a mistake.

    3. Its an easy tactic to dismiss opposition by not acknowledging the true issue behind it, but by distracting focus to another force. When the opposition is “secretly funded” by “others” – it feels good to think you’re in on the conspiracy. That you and your smart friends have figured it out. That there are larger, guiding, planned, forces at work. For these protests, George Soros is the grand puppet master. Either directly paying protesters or skillfully deceiving naive snowflake millennials to perform his bidding for free. Its a tactic that’s been going on for as long as there have been rulers and opposition. (Ask Putin how America pays for protesters in the Ukraine.) The fact is there truly is this much outrage, but the “outrage” is frothed over by both sides and in many instances overblown and BS.

    4. While its easier to boil issues and people down to simple discussion points, the reality is its much, much more complex and nuanced than that. ON BOTH SIDES. I don’t believe Trump is a racist, bigot, dictator anymore than I believe those who oppose him are lazy, incel, special snowflakes. I really wish people would get out of their entrenched view points and take a more measured approach – instead of the reactionary hyperbole (on both sides). There are way more important issues than this noise that’s being shoved upon us. Trump’s “abortion ban” was more nuanced and less impactful than many media outlets would suggest. His “muslim ban”, though I disagree very much with the initial green card component, is more a temporary travel ban. His “firing” of Yates, was done when she has only had a few days left till Trump’s actual appointee is confirmed.

    I do concede though that these executive orders, while by themselves are not as inflammatory as they have been made out to be, they *may* be the beginning of something bigger – which for many is protest worthy. Still, its all ‘effin noise, in the face of the economy, healthcare, and the environment. Those are issues that truly impact large groups of people in this country and our future. Yet the focus is on all the issues that impact very small populations, but produce a visceral reaction to the larger group. They are a distraction. The travel ban, “white privilege”, who can use what bathroom, who’s lives matter more, who’s allowed in the boyscouts, which guns are bad, you get the idea. All noise meant to distract and entrench us.

    5. We do indeed live in interesting times, but this is not unprecedented at all, certainly not in American history. The core human condition that motivates us to favor one ideology or the other, has always been based on “feels” over “facts”. If there’s anything unprecedented about the times we live in, perhaps its the ability for information, real or fake, to proliferate quickly. For those of us who’ve spent our adult lives through only 1 or 3 presidents it seems like a seismic shift of American policies – but the truth is we’ve always been this way. We are a country that’s been divided and that division narrows and widens throughout our nation’s history.

    Both sides need to calm the hell down, but its always easier to fear than to understand, and neither side is really doing a good job at cutting through the noise. Rather, each side prefers to amplify it, to shift the focus, and to entrench people further.

    There’s been plenty of “alternative facts” that are highlighted and cherry picked on both sides. Its not enough to highlight how the other side is wrong, each side needs to be better understood.

    I’ll leave you with this excellent video from Bill Maher, who hits it on the head with Democrats. While he’s a bit too critical of Trump, his assessment of the Democrats’ policy to force feed its social narrative is spot on. And a very real reason why they are losing hearts and minds. Its an assessment I’ve seen the brothers Baruth level and one, even though I lean more Democrat, can get behind as well.

    Its a good look in the mirror, one Republicans would do well to perform too. Perhaps, if that actually occurred, on both sides, we could elevate the dialog. But nah…. this is America.

    Reply
      • Will

        You have to stop hanging out on Gawker. That saying is beyond annoying…Won the internet, so annoying when those clowns do it over there.

        Reply
        • VoGo

          I’ve never been on Gawker. Is that the site that went bankrupt because a Trump supporter backed Hulk Hogan suing them for publicizing his infidelity?

          Sorry that my phrasing was annoying to you. I really liked Ken’s post. Does that meet your standards?

          Reply
          • Will

            That phrase is obnoxious and everything wrong with hyperbolic language. That’s all. (It was epic! Watch this person get slammed! etc..) The internet is not a win/loss game.

            It was because they publicized a private moment. It’s amazingly hard to lose a libel suit and Gawker has done it a few times. They’re morally bankrupt, childish and have zero intellectual sense.

  16. Matt

    Bark, the notion that refugees and immigrants are simply coming here to mooch off of the system (and murder you in your sleep, as the now-President intimated in his nomination acceptance speech) is just wrong. Immigrants and refugees are often the most motivated people in the country and are extremely grateful and proud Americans. I know because I’m married to one.

    I’m pretty sure Jack alluded to this recently when he said he doesn’t want his son to have to compete with them.

    Reply
    • Will

      The issue seems to be more of knowing who is coming over rather then letting anyone just come on in without some type of protocol. These countries tend to have poor political systems and extremist views on laws and society. We forget that Ellis Island often recorded who came over, from where, criminal records, etc… I know this because all my family came through Ellis Island and it was easy to find out everything. A by product of this is how I know I can’t get polish citizenship because Poland didn’t exist at the time.

      Often times the new wave of immigrants do not want to become “American”; this is the real problem. Our past ancestors changed their names and pronunciations to fit in to show that they wanted to be here, make money and leave their old lives behind to start anew. This gets lost in all the BS protests. You can’t believe the American way is superior and support sharia law, it does’t jive.

      The announcement wasn’t thought through and its execution a joke, but controlling our borders is a serious issue that schmucks in east coast cities, who only deal with immigrants because they’re their uber driver & cleaning person, never seem to understand. It’s a cynical strategy by the Donald to keep making the media and the “protestors” look like lunatics to win votes. If he had thought this through and it took the necessary precautions I doubt it wouldn’t be as crazy as it has been.

      Reply
      • Matt

        I certainly agree that immigrants should seek to assimilate (while maintaining cultural/family traditions) and we have to be careful about who comes here. Obama had a rigorous system in place, but it’s also reasonable for the new administration to put in place a temporary hold while it reviews the incumbent policies and determines what, if any adjustments are needed.

        I seriously don’t get this obsession with Sharia law, or the notion that somehow Islamic extremism or terrorism poses an existential threat to America and our way of life. We have a system of laws in place in this country, called the Constitution. It says that there shall be no establishment of religion. Americans believe fundamentally in secular government, even if we privately hold (or don’t) parochial religious values. NO ONE WANTS SHARIA LAW HERE. The only people who seem to think so are people on the right who are looking for reasons to ridicule lefty protesters. I seriously have no idea where this comes from.

        On the existential threat of terrorism – give me a break. These are bumkin-ass backwards, fanatical goat herders. Obviously we should devote lots resources to ensuring that potential terrorists don’t come over here, and we should work with the Muslim world so that they confront this cultural cancer internally and excise it permanently. But to think that somehow American greatness is at risk, or that this is the biggest issue we face – give me a break.

        Reply
        • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

          The concern about sharia law comes from people who are doing the math on population replacement.

          Traditional American families are stopping at two kids. Many Americans aren’t even having children.

          Meanwhile, Muslim families are like the Catholic families of my youth — everybody has nine kids.

          That kind of math gives you an Islamic majority in three generations. At that point, it doesn’t matter what the Constitution says.

          Furthermore, as Britain and France have already found out, at sufficient concentration and volume the Muslims tend to create no-go zones for everybody else. And that’s well before they have a majority of the population. There are places on the Continent where it’s no longer safe to be a descendant of the people who settled the land.

          Reply
          • Matt

            Jack, I’d say you’ve been watching those fever-dream youtube videos about the European refugee crisis too much. You’ve probably suffered a few nightmares featuring well-endowed black dudes banging fair-skinned maidens in refugee camps as a result.

            Look, I don’t begrudge the Europeans for wanting to stay European. They don’t have the “melting pot” tradition that we have here. And they also have an unfortunate “land bridge” connection to the middle east.

            But, here in America, most immigrants tend to assimilate pretty quickly – apparent Somali neighborhoods in Columbus notwithstanding. People tend to come here to escape all that Sharia B.S., not to perpetuate it. At the end of the day, immigrants are just people. And people tend to enjoy their secular freedoms in this country, regardless of background.

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

            I don’t think there are any fair-skinned maidens in the refugee camps, although there certainly were a few in the Cologne train station on New Year’s Eve.

            I’m afraid your beliefs, and your experience, directly contradict what I’ve been observing firsthand since 1997. My pal “Rodney” lives in Somali territory. I don’t take my son there after dark. The community has sent fighters to ISIS. There is huge tension between Somalis and African-Americans; both see the other as uneducated animals.

            You say that “At the end of the day, immigrants are just people. And people tend to enjoy their secular freedoms in this country, regardless of background.”

            The stats (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/07/22/muslims-and-islam-key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/) say that most American Muslims feel very strongly about their religion, and a full eight percent of them support violence in the service of Islam.

          • VoGo

            “a full eight percent of them [Muslims] support violence in the service of Islam.”

            Explain the Crusades to me, please. Also the American-Indian wars.

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

            Happy to do it.

            The Crusades, and the American-Indian wars, were things that happened in the past and offer no more threat to actual living human beings than does the Cyclops mentioned in the Odyssey.

            Put another way, it’s the difference between complaining that your grandfather slapped my grandmother and me announcing on Facebook that I’ll be stopping by your house this afternoon to rape your wife. Hope that helps.

          • VoGo

            Jeepers creepers, Jack! All I’m saying is that there are militant edges to most religions, even today. Rape fantasies about my wife not required.

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

            Feel free to substitute “burn your house down” then, although as we’ve seen in Europe, rape is very much part of the migrant plan.

          • Aoletsgo

            I agree with most of what you are saying and I think that the problem that non-Muslim Europeans and Americans have with Muslims is the fear they will not assimilate into “polite” society. I think this is a legitimate fear as Christians and Muslims have been enemies and at war with each other for a thousand years. Of course there are individual exceptions and periods of simmering peace.
            However, be careful with your simplistic, extrapolation of population trends. Yes currently in this country and in Europe, Muslim’s have lots of kids and educated white folk do not. Maybe, just maybe the second or third generation of these families will want the more expensive, good life, which means 0-2 kids in the future?

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

            Pete,

            If any of those women is any better than an Ohio 6.0 I’ll stand on my left leg until it hurts more than it normally does. Chunkers and desperate 40-ish is what I’m guessing. The same British women who do sex tourism in Jamaica.

          • Mike

            Vogo, yes there are militant edges to some religions (not heard of any for Buddhists though) but the crusades were centuries ago and the most militant edge is with Islam now. Hence why it gets attention.

          • VoGo

            Mike,
            Thanks for stalking every single thing I write and offering a contrary view. I hope you are making a lot of money doing this; because otherwise, it is one creepy hobby.

        • Will

          Never assume a goat herder can’t become battle hardened is a second; there’s ample history that disproves this. Underestimating the human capability for mobilization for war is a road to disaster; many a rice farmer killed a lot of Americans in Vietnam.

          Sharia law, while not implemented here, is fundamentally a religious institution; it’s why Jewish women don’t need a Get, catholic women can get abortions and divorces and so on. This is the separation of church and state that matters here while in other muslim countries, not so much.

          Reply
        • Bark M Post author

          No one wants Sharia law here? You mean other than one of the principal organizers of the “most powerful movement in American history,” Linda Sarsour? Or the thirty or so people who perform honor killings of their daughters in the US every year? Just because you typed it in all caps doesn’t make it true.

          Reply
          • Matt

            The women’s march was not about the organizers or funders. Those people just filled out the paperwork so the bureaucrats in D.C. would be administratively prepared to handle the large number of marchers. The march was about the sincere feelings, concerns, political beliefs, etc. of the marchers and was very much and organic phenomenon. No one read any secret manifesto or has any idea who the fuck Linda Sarsour is, except for Breitbart readers. None of the marchers gives a fuck. None of them in any way is in favor of Sharia law.

            And don’t be asinine by responding when I say “no one” or “none” that there are 30-some deranged fucks who participate in honor killings in the US every year.

          • Bark M Post author

            As somebody who represents himself as a cisgender male, I’m not sure your womynkin would appreciate you telling them what the March was all about.

            However, let’s just say for a second that somebody had to organize these ladies. Why do you think it was a an American woman who peddles Sharia law like it’s an NYC hot dog on the corner? Didn’t somebody have to pick a date? Didn’t somebody have to get a stage, and a microphone, and some celebrities? You’re not applying critical thinking skills, sir. Hundreds of thousands of people don’t “organically” march simultaneously around the world. Is it just possible—and I know this is crazy talk—that just maybe these women were being used as willing idiots to advance a cause that they’re not even aware of?

            Because every single liberal I know likes Islam more than Christianity. They don’t know why. They’ve never read the Q’uran. They don’t know who Mohammed was. They probably have zero concept of Sharia. But they’ll defend the shit out of it, all while calling Christians “rednecks.” Ever wonder why that is?

            As for your other comment about 30 “deranged fucks,” they’re not deranged. They’re following Sharia law. They’re completely sane.

            EDIT: I don’t know where I read deranged fucks. You didn’t say that. But the point remains. These are solemn and serious people.

          • Matt

            You realize that saying “there are thirty some honor killings in the US every year, ergo Sharia law is coming to America” is exactly the same as liberals saying “150 people showed up to Richard Spencer’s election party, therefore Trump is Literally Hitler.”

            Really, Bark?

          • Bark M Post author

            You think attending a party is the same as making the conscious decision to whack your own daughter?

            Lemme guess…D.C. resident.

          • Matt

            Liberals don’t hate Christianity, they just resent it being used as a wedge to force social positions into their lives that they vehemently disagree with. The same way you don’t appreciate being called a deplorable bigot because you don’t want to live in a world where gender archetypes have been watered down to the point of meaningless-ness. Liberals haven’t experienced that same type of “oppression” from muslims. To your point, should Sharia law (somehow, however implausibly) gain a substantial foothold in this country, they would oppose it just as vehemently. Surely, Islam is the most conservative of the 3 major religions and is therefore anathema to liberal ideals if not multicultural ones. But go ahead, keep playing the victim.

            Yes, I am a D.C. resident with Southwestern roots. I did not participate in the rally because I think identity politics are both counterproductive and divisive. I’m not content to retrench into a comfort blanket worldview which holds that all Trump supporters are bigots and racists, so I make active efforts (admittedly much more since the election) to understand where people “outside the bubble” as you might put it, are coming from. This website helps a lot with that. However, I’m not trying to defect; I’m trying to bridge the gap.

            I’m not mansplaining what the women were crying about during the march. I hosted a few in my home and pushed them quite a bit on their beliefs and also listened actively to what their grievances are. I’m representing those accurately here ant not “telling them what the march was about.” Instead, I am relating to you (from them) that none of the marchers were there to support – directly or indirectly- Sharia law. That is just utter nonsense and yes, the equivalent comfort story that you tell yourself to demonize the other side and to not consider their perspective. The marchers were not organized by anyone besides possibly the facebook echo chamber that allowed themselves to convince each other that somehow we are on the brink of mysoginist oppression becoming de facto law in this country.

            On the Sharia = NPI argument, what I’m saying is that you are pointing to an extreme minority of folks and extrapolating wildly to paint half of the country with a ridiculous caricature. The net effect is to allow you to smugly assert your moral high ground without the critical analysis you accuse me of lacking, comfortable and happy railing against strawmen and working yourself up in to a frenzy.

          • Bark M Post author

            Nonsense. Liberals loathe Christianity. Just look at the comments in this thread. They view its practitioners as backwards, uneducated science deniers.

            Yet Islam, which is, as you say, the most “conservative” (I’d say un-American, but that’s just me) religion, finds all liberal ideas not only offensive but heretical, and they’ll gladly stone the shit out of you. Or toss you off a building. But keep fighting for their rights, libs! Once you get your way, they’ll be happy to send you to the slaughter.

          • Zykotec

            ‘Conservative’ Islam is largely a post WW2 thing, in the same way as much of the creationist conservative Christianity is. They are both ‘hipster-religions’ with little or no tradition behind them at all. What makes Christianity seem like the less conservative and less violent religion today is largey due to the fact that it has been watered down so much that it can be accepted by almost everyone over the last millennias. Just so that Christians can say they are the largest religion.

            As for ‘anti-american’ , yes, modern ‘conservative’ Islam was literally created to battle US supremacy in some areas. But also funded by the US to a large part. If I recall correctly partly even funded by drug money from US supported fascist states in South America.
            They grew in war torn areas, either because of the cold war, or because the US made shitloads of money supporting both sides in one war.

            You(we) literally brought this on yourselves, by force, while making money on it, and you(we) freaking enjoyed it. It can’t be overstated enough.
            You(we) chose Sharia law over communism.
            Because throwing gay people off roofs, and stoning cheating wives (or just raped daughters) somehow seemed so much better than having to share your(our) wealth with others, or having to pay for gas for your V8’s.
            (‘we’ in parantheses because Norway has made quite a decent living out of both oil and weapons, hell we even made shitlods of money transporting slaves back in the day, while being known as such a peace loving socialist country powered by waterfalls)

            Some say Saddam Hussein literally ‘became a muslim’ when Bush the older said ‘God’ was with him in the Iraq war.

            While I don’t hate any religious people, or believe all atheists or agnostics are more intelligent, I think religion has no place in a modern government, just like your founding fathers didn’t think so either.

            (PS, Henry Ford the older really appreciated his muslim workers)

    • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

      What I was alluding to was the fact that American corporations would rather hire four fake-resume overseas-sourced idiots at $25/hour than one competent person at $100/hr. That’s why the tech sector has gone from the bright shining economic hope of America to Bangalore-by-the-Sea, and it’s why we’ve had a wage freeze in tech since 2002.

      Some refugees are highly motivated people: our race team has two first-generation Serbian immigrants on it. Some immigrants are pieces of shit: the Somali community in Columbus accounts for 5% of the population and 50% of the violent crime, not to mention 100% of the human trafficking.

      The current system discriminates against Europeans and other traditional American forebears while de facto privileging unskilled Mexicans and hyper-violent Third Worlders whose beliefs are fundamentally incompatible with American society.

      Reply
      • Matt

        “wage freeze in tech since 2002.”

        I’m gonna need some authority there, and I know that’s your day job. Tech companies are the most common start-ups, and the demand for software engineers seems limitless. I know several people who are quite intelligent but don’t have college degrees who have gone to tech “boot camps” and had companies tripping over themselves to hire them starting in the low 6 figures.

        Reply
        • Bark M Post author

          I love this new thing from the left—I get it on Jalopnik every time I post. “I’m gonna need to you to prove everything you say is true while I quote some statistics from the Southern Poverty Law Center!”

          Out of curiosity, how long did your friends keep those jobs? Because 99 out of 100 tech startups fail miserably. The established companies are the ones importing H-1Bs.

          Reply
      • VoGo

        Jack,
        You start with a kernel of truth (many immigrants are productive and improve America; others not) and then you extrapolate in ways that aren’t helpful. One could read your last paragraph as an endorsement of favoring immigration by whites (i.e., European Americans) vs. Latinos or Africans.

        Not to put words in your mouth, but I think what you are trying to say is that an immigration policy which is bureaucratic and favors immigration of relatives –regardless of their beliefs or work potential — is simply not working for us, especially as it’s ignored by 11M people. Whereas, an immigration plan that focused on expediting citizenship for those who contribute to American productivity and values, and excluded residency for those who do not, would serve us better.

        Reply
      • Will

        But in Lewiston, Maine (where I went to college), Somali’s are misunderstood! Yes, there is a large Somali population there for some odd reason.

        Reply
  17. N3TRUN

    I take it that seeing a lot of white people protesting on relatively short notice is a strong indicator of privilege? I’m cool with that.

    To take the converse of that would mean that the non-white Americans (underprivileged) are doing the real work in this country and don’t have the luxury of zipping off to a protest regardless of their feelings or desires to be involved. If so, this is the basis of the argument for adding points to standardized test scores based on race and a presupposed lower standard of education. Would a conclusion then be that these reforms haven’t gone far enough?

    Or does it imply that non-white Americans would avoid the protest areas on principle because they’d fear repercussions? That is, even if you are a legal non-white Latino American do you avoid rallies and protests regarding immigration in the current anti-immigration political climate because you fear you or your family would come under increased scrutiny of the legitimacy of your naturalization? I can tell you that I know several non-white Americans as well as white and non-white green card holders who are increasingly worried about upcoming policy changes regarding immigration, their ability to travel, and their ability to return. The second and third order effects of these sudden policy changes are as yet unknown and their potential harm to real people and their careers can be very ugly.

    In any case, the intent behind the travel restrictions from the 7 countries makes perfect sense to me. I am little confused on why a few countries were left off the list but maybe that is coming later? It may have made more sense to have talked to a few lawyers, gotten some buy-in from the groups that have to execute this policy change, and flesh out the details a lot more before rolling out such a big, sweeping change. I get that it wouldn’t have been as flashy or gotten as many headlines, maybe, but it would have been more effective without so much chaos.

    Reply
  18. VTNoah

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXinJIvpPOo
    To quote Jules from Pulp Fiction, “Well allow me to retort!”

    To say that Liberals don’t show up for those in need is patently false considering that a significant portion of the US population considers itself left of center (not foaming out the mouth liberal, but not conservative) Case in point, my parents, unabashed liberals hired plenty of refugees for their business for the entirety of their business’ existence. Mainly Bosnian (muslims), and Vietnamese (my mother would drive an hour a day bringing them to and from work). We had a few Sudanese muslims working for us as well. They were consistently the hardest working, most dependable employees we had. We also hired plenty of lower income locals who did really well. When it was time to sell, the company and its assets were sold to a Sudanese refugee who started his own natural foods company from scratch and was looking to expand. My sister, also a liberal, would provide free nonmedical eldercare to refugee families who had a grandmother or grandfather who was dying and couldn’t afford hospice. In college, I shared classes with many of the Sudanese “Lost Boys”, all Muslim Refugees from war torn African Countries, and far more motivated to “Make it” than any of us local kids just going through the motions. Vermont has a large population of refugees and we rarely if ever have problems, this includes folks from Somalia.

    I agree with you on the facebook activism front though. Actually going out and protesting, that’s another thing. Ever think that they are protesting for those that can’t take the day off?

    Reply
  19. DirtRoads

    Social media is a blessing and a curse. But I guess that’s because it’s used by humans.

    What would the world look like if social media were only used by fish? *sigh*

    Reply
  20. 1A

    There are at least five distortions (lies) here by leftists. I started to respond, but I’m just going to go with: “Donald Trump won; you lost; deal with it.” That’s all that really matters. You heard his plans and goals the whole campaign–1.5 years, day in and day out. You should have tried harder. You failed. You will have a “sad” eight years, for that I do not care (I hated every single day of BHO’s reign). I campaigned my ass off for DJT. I hate what you leftists now represent and I will support DJT every single motherfucking step of the way.

    Reply
    • VoGo

      I take this to mean that you are in favor of healthcare for all, quadrupling our spending on infrastructure and a radical increases in funding to address inner city issues, because Trump voiced support for all of these recently.

      Reply
      • 1A

        Above, I wrote: “For the first time in my life, I was going to vote for the left if DJT didn’t run.” So no, we’re not all the fictitious villains the left portrays us to be.
        I don’t have every minute detail of his plans on every single issue, but yes, he touched on what you said–“Our cities are crumbling, our bridges are falling down, our airports are third-world, some places are a real hell-hole; Obamacare is a failure; inner-city crime is atrocious, something needs to be done!” All paraphrases of course.
        What put the nail in the coffin for the Democrats in my view was Hillary and Bernie on stage deciding who was going to take the most guns away. NUH UH, that doesn’t fly. You will not take my rights as an American citizen away from me! Law and order. That’s why DJT won the electoral vote 306 to 236 (YUUUGE!).

        Reply
  21. Frank Galvin

    In 2013, my toddler son and I missed the train to Boston on Patriots Day. My friend, who we were supposed to meet, is still dealing with the after effects of stepping over body parts and picking rubble out of her hair. All courtesy of some “New Americans” who spent their “refugee” life on the dole. I can’t accept an immigration policy, pushed on me from the left, that effectively states that wholesale carnage, massacres, and other homicides must be accepted otherwise we’re all xenophobic, jingoistic rascists. Fuck ’em.

    Reply
    • 1A

      “an immigration policy, pushed on me from the left” – don’t forget all of Republicans who were part of this for years and years as well. my vote for Trump was a big middle-finger salute to all of those bastards.

      Reply
    • VoGo

      Frank,
      While I appreciate the sentiment as I ran in the marathon the year prior, and my wife and kids were in the exact same spectator stands that were blown up the following year.

      But I think its important to deal in fact. The Tsarnaevs were not refugees at any point. In fact no refugee has been involved in a terrorist attack in the US since 9/11. Refugees are the most heavily vetted entrants to the US, and pose no meaningful risk to us.

      The older Tsarnaev brother was in the process of becoming a citizen, but Homeland Security put a hold on the process because the FBI had been investigating him. He was a loser who lived off his wife and the dole. The younger brother was a US citizen and enrolled in college at U Mass, Dartmouth.

      Current US immigration policy wasn’t “pushed by the left.” It is, in fact, is 3 decades old, but political infighting on both sides have prevented real reform since then. You saw how things played out in the Republican primaries last year, as candidates like Rubio and Bush who had attempted reform were ridiculed by opponents and shunned by voters.

      No rational, responsible person is saying that if you don’t accept massacres, you’re a racist. These aren’t helpful accusations.

      Reply
      • Frank Galvin

        The Tsarnev’s were refugees. Arrived under a tourist visa and then claimed political asylum. We can quibble about semantics, i.e. refugee or asylum seekers, but the vetting appears to be non-existent.

        Many of those that are pushing for open borders and unchecked refugees are neither rational or responsible. They don’t have to live with the fallout, and more often than not, play the racism card when rational people inquire into the societal cost.

        As for whether the accusation is helpful or not, at this point, I’m done with caring. It reflects my perception of where I live, what I read, what I bear witness too. Someone in Chevy Chase, Wellesley, or the Upper West Side may react differently. Good for them, I’m simply done caring.

        Reply
        • VoGo

          Frank,
          The Tsarnaevs were not refugees. That’s just a fact, no matter what neighborhood you live in or political party you favor. It’s important to understand that refugees are separate from immigrants. As it is, the US accepts very few refugees, and we vet them very carefully. As a result, in the last 15 years, no refugee has carried out a single terrorist attack in the US.

          This refugee program is now under attack. And when you lump refugees together with other immigrants, or even citizens, you just create confusion. Maybe that’s the plan.

          Look, I am all in favor of deporting permanently anyone who is going to commit a terrorist act. But the truth is that Christian citizen Dylann Roof killed more people than the 750K refugees admitted in the last 15 years. So why would we seek to ban the innocent?

          Reply
          • Bark M Post author

            It’s funny how libs always want to say “since 9/11” or “in the last 15 years” like we didn’t have 3,000 Americans killed and 6,000 injured SIXTEEN years ago.

          • VoGo

            Yeah, Bark,
            15 of 19 of the attackers were from Saudi Arabia, one of the countries NOT on the Trump ban, and also a place – and this is purely coincidence – where Trump Enterprises does business.

            Putting aside the conflict of interest, wouldn’t it make sense to align the ban with the countries actually producing the people attacking us?

          • Bark M Post author

            Sweet, so you want to expand the restrictions? Let’s do it!

            And also because you have the most simple possible understanding of business, I’ll also list some other companies which “do business” in the Kingdom of Saud:

            Ford
            General Electric
            AIG
            Harris
            Westinghouse
            Motorola
            Deloitte
            Merck
            Coca-Cola
            Citi
            Boeing
            Pfizer
            AT&T
            CIGNA

            I mean, we’re pretty much talking about the entire Fortune 50. But if you think that Trump has nefarious plans because of a hotel or two…sure. Keep being simple.

          • VoGo

            I worked at one of those companies. And if an owner of that company was also President of the United States, he would immediately divest, so as to prevent even the appearance of a conflict of interest.

            The issue isn’t who does business there, but whether they can profit by their own decisions, at the expense of the American people.

          • Mike

            The US has accepted 700000 refugees in the past decade with close to 100000 last year alone. So it isn’t a few.

        • 1A

          As typical with the left: yes, semantics..

          Copied from Washington Post (asterisks my own): “The parents of the Tsarnaev brothers reached the United States on tourist visas and applied for asylum. ********To get asylum, an applicant must meet the definition of a refugee********, but unlike a refugee he or she has already reached the United States and is subject to a different application process. After the Tsarnaevs obtained asylee status, they successfully applied for derivative asylee status for their children.”

          (hey everyone, type “Tsarnaev refugees” real slow in Google and see what happens–VOODOO! Disappears right before your very eyes, TTAC-style!).

          Reply
          • VoGo

            1Alpha,
            If you cannot comprehend the difference between a citizen of the US and a refugee, then this really isn’t the right conversation for you.

          • Bark M Post author

            Maybe if you’re not aware how refugees /asylum seekers can apply to become naturalized citizens, then this really isn’t the conversation for you. But you COULD ask Bozi Tatarevic, who did exactly that.

          • VoGo

            Did this Bozi you speak of go around killing people? No, he’s a hard working dude. So why are you so opposed to distinguishing between the terrorists and the innocent? Why not get behind an executive order that actually reduces risk rather than merely grabbing headlines for its ineptitude?

          • Bark M Post author

            You clearly haven’t read the executive order. You’ve been too busy being the most prolific commenter in the history of our blog (for which I thank you).

          • 1A

            @VoGotohell
            1Alpha, that’s cute, but, unsurprisingly, you don’t know what it (1A) means. And for that, all of your previous comments keep making more and more sense!
            Who mentioned citizen? Dude, I know all about the system. You see, my family hasn’t been here for generations and generations. I kind of have an appreciation for how things work, a respect for the laws of the land my ancestors immigrated to…and I plan on defending them!

          • VoGo

            1A,
            Sorry I messed up your name. You’re right – I don’t have a clue what 1A means. And I think its great that your family immigrated here and respect our laws. I hope that means you agree with me that America should open its borders to law abiding people who just want to work hard and contribute to our great land.

          • 1A

            @VoGo
            “I hope that means you agree with me that America should open its borders to law abiding people who just want to work hard and contribute to our great land”
            I believe this is already the case???
            I don’t agree with you just because you feel a certain way. I believe in strong immigration laws–my family had to abide by the very same rules and standards. Plus, we didn’t come from a land where radicals lived, threatening America’s very existence.
            So, yeah, I’m all for “getting this figured out” as Trump has stated.
            This was a huge part of his platform! This should not come as a surprise to you all! (Why do I sound like a second-grade teacher?).

  22. Zykotec

    First of all, people who are either white or hard to distinguish from white people make out around 80% of the US population. So even a protest that is skewed towards minorities compared to the norm can still apear mostly white.

    Secondly, as a European you guys have no ‘left’ side of politics of any meaningful size. I know that a lot of people who supported Hillary considere themselves ‘lefties’ and she probably did herself after she became a Democrat, but as soon as yuu get any power the coorporations will come running with all the money you are willing to take to make their lives easier. The saying ‘power corrupts’ is more or less a law of nature . And when you’re rich it’s not unusual to lose contact with the ‘grassroot’ and the ‘common man’ and all that.
    The left didn’t lose the election, Hillary had ‘lost’ her ‘left’. Also the DP forced their lefite candidate out of the election. While that certainly wasn’t very nice of them I don’t think voting for potentially more terrorism and a potential war against China was a good way to get back at her.

    Thirdly you are all technically all lefties anyway despite what some Europeans will say. Living in a socialist society with taxes and police and hospitals, and you even care about your peers mostly. Despite a lot of religious BS that I can’t stand, for the most part I think Americans themselves tend to lean a lot more to the left than they would ever admit. Europe may lean even further to the left apart from all the racism, but that doesn’t really make you proper ‘right-wing’.

    One good thing about Trump (or rather the medias image of Trump) is that a lot of previously right-wing Europeans have started thinking there is such a thing as ‘too far right’. Even people who I thought was just one step from joining the Nazi party call him a racist and bigot, so there is hope for Europeans too.

    Reply
    • Jack BaruthJack Baruth

      The United States has this unique combination of social liberalism and economic conservatism where you take $500,000 a speech from Goldman Sachs but you have to nod in approval of the SF Pride Parade and all the various leather-bear stuff.

      Reply
      • VoGo

        How much leather-bear stuff do I have to approve of to get the $500K? While I could use the cash, I do have my limits. Well, not really. OK, bring on the leather bear stuff. I’m in. You can keep the Goldman money.

        Reply
      • Foxy Wolverton

        Better yet, you work for Goldman Sachs and donate to those candidates upper management tells you that its in GS’s best interest. Then take a big hunk of that bonus money that you earned from waking up every day at 4:00 AM to hop on the Metro-North into the City, and apply it to tuition at some east coast haven for the perpetually aggrieved. Before junior even attends a class, he’ll be sent off to programming at his NSO run by the LGBTQIA and Healthy Masculinity center. You’ll love the description of the programming that comes out of his mouth and pray to God that he’ll stick with a club sport, and take business or engineering classes to inoculate himself from this madness.

        Reply
      • Zykotec

        America can be a bit hard to understand some times.
        I’m honestly quite surprised that ‘being corrupt’ was suddenly an issue in this election. Did someone really think decisions were made by the politicians alone before?
        Sometimes it seems the conspiracy theorists make up conspiracies just because they deny how simple and obvious the truth usually is.
        Or just because they honestly have no idea how the real world works.
        Modern conspiracy theorists would probably blame Nixon or hippies for trying to kill off poor people with exploding cars, when the real reason Pintos (and all other cars at the time) caught fire in crashes was because manufacturers tried to save a few bucks.

        Even though European politicians are probably as corrupt as the Americans ones, I think it is weird that so many people over there are against having a publicly elected (most likely corrupt) leader/government tell them what to do, but everyone is completely fine with having a actual coorporation (whos sole objective is to drain them of money) tell them how to live their lives.
        Like the way some people are afraid the socialist government will take away their cars, when in reality it will be the insurance companies…
        Not to mention letting tobacco companies all over the world shame all living and dead dictators accumulated with their kill count.
        Most of the western world are indoctrinated with the ‘brave new word’ by now, but I feel you have had a good 40 years head start. Young adults (sometimes up to the age of 40) are probably more interested in news about the next Marvel or DC movie than they are interested in learning about Trumps past.

        In some way electing Trump can be seen as a more ‘honest’ choice, as you are ‘cuttin out the middle man’ by just letting an actual (self-proclaimed)1-percenter make the decisions directly instead of having to lobby for each decision to be made. I know many people voted for this exact reason more or less, but It still looks exceptionally stupid from the outside.

        Reply
        • CJinSD

          You do know that an insurance company can only take away our cars if an ‘elected’ official says we have to buy their insurance, don’t you?

          Reply
          • Zykotec

            Well, maybe the ‘elected official’ is trying to save you from ambulance chasing lawyers?
            To be honest I do not even understand how basic car insurance in the US does not automatically pay for the damages your cause , so you probably need more elected officials anyway.

  23. Ronnie Schreiber

    When I was in college, in the computer and psych departments they were still playing around with ELIZA.

    I’m beginning to wonder about VoGo, if he’s real or if he’s some kind of AI bot. So many of the responses are just so predictable I’m not sure that they’d pass the Turing test.

    Reply
      • Mike

        I believe you started it by attacking him (and his businesses) many times. So it is natural to attack back. I comment on your posts occasionally (much less than 50% as you stated, because I couldn`t keep up with your prolific posts) because you need correction on some false assertions you make and only very reluctantly admit you are wrong.

        Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *