NSR: Give me your rested, your rich, privileged White Colombians yearning to post in soccer forums...

I read Villus' story and I am very sympathetic for him. I can understand where he's from and actually understand as to why he has his views.

I respect him for that. But as I said before I can't allow emotional feelings (or just feelings in general) to make me biased and thus I still stand against illegal immigration Political asylum is justifiable but there are competitive cases depending where you're from; for example, cubans for a long time had the
Wet feet, dry feet policy until 2017 which I am sure a lot of people here who lived in Miami knows about.


The issue with political asylum requests is that this can come from anywhere across the world. Hell this also is a debate itself on how many we can actually grant waivers for said requesters. There's a limitation as to the previous argument in the past regarding that we can't just take in everyone just like that and there are limitations for various reasons.

In other words: who deserves it more depending on where they're from and with who they're wanting to gain it with? That's a question and debate that happens across those requests.

 

I think you guys are mixing me up with kromekote, his was the story of immigration from Colombia that was shared.

 

You're right. My mistake; I didn't remember who it was and didn't realize that it was kromekote's story.

 

1. No argument there, regardless they still decide around the world no matter how common the request is and this is influenced by many factors. Hence it's a toss up with whoever they feel deserves it.

2. Again, no argument but once again in the end they will take into consideration. This and the previous argument all relates to how they feel political relations with said nations that the respective immigrant will turn out; for example, there can potentially be a reaction where a country becomes hostile (or at least more if it already exists) and may see this as an insult. It may seem far-fetched but this why "political correctness" can influence things where any country will have their choices influenced. For example, edward snowden struggled to gain political asylum in many countries and Russia became the country that took him in (From what I recall, it was over 20 countries) and this did have an effect on US-Russia relations. It's debatable on how well these practices are being done whether or not they're effective.

But this is unique for anyone with their different cases.

3. The issue with this claim of "opening the door to abuse, mistreatment and asshattery" is far from the truth as well as issues with "human decency". Why I say this is because people had already a bad view on illegal immigration for such a long time. I sure as hell remember this growing up as a kid and Trump being stricter on border control has not changed already existing distaste for illegal immigration. Are people more sympathetic? Do people change their minds? Yeah, that's normal, but Trump with his zero-tolerance policy only made more aware of different views and ideas as to why we debate over this. Quite frankly, this is why Trump, despite popular belief has had actual latino supporters.



https://www.facebook.com/LatinosandHispanicsforDonaldTrump/

https://www.facebook.com/OfficialLatinosForTrump/

Now as I mentioned in the past I don't support Trump nor do I agree with everything on his policies. Quite frankly, I did not want him nor Hillary to be president and thus I do not complain that people voted for him. I say this because Trump doesn't only attract racist people despite the propaganda.



"Being offended doesn't work anymore" is one of the most important quotes of our time. And this also explains the issue with biased propaganda.

And numbers are naturally increasing due to the issues in latin America (as you said) changing over time. ESPECIALLY with what's happened in Venezuela, it was pointed out that they began migrating to country to country for better chances and life. Of course, they eventually build up more and more within Mexico, the country just before america.


4. Yes, that's part of budgeting. As you recall, whether we got a new president or some "actions" were taken, media was able to promote the amount of money "saved" or "needed to spend" or something along those lines. Depending on the political agenda, any of these could be used as a good or bad thing.

It's like how Republicans were trying hard to say that Bernie Sanders was a old fool who made people believe that things were able to be "free" when everything cost money when obvious everything does cost money. The issue with their argument is that Bernie Sanders himself said that it's about budgeting and balancing out with taxes and how they invest their money.

Overall we're not simultaneously spending a "ridiculous set" amount of money that a previous policy had in motion when deciding to invest money towards another thing. The reason why we're able to spend the amount of money needed within our capabilities is because we divert and budgets from various points to others. That's why for example depending on what their goals and views are, more of the budget will be directed towards one thing and less of a other and vice versa.

 

And overall, videos like these made me understand more and more why people voted for Trump, as I need to clarify my views and why despite not being a supporter of Trump himself, understand why and what influenced his election.

 

Dude in Connecticut the Hispanic and black immigrant that come legally get sent to shit neighborhoods the Romanians, Bosnians and Albanians when they came they were sent to the suburbs with better schools and nicer housing.

In the US they defiantly treat people differently

 

They don't get "sent" anywhere; they settle where they can afford to live and typically that's the shitty/humble neighborhoods or the better ones. A buddy of mine in the Navy is straight from Kenya who has lived in America for less than 5 years and another dude straight from Nigeria who came to America quite recently. This isn't an era where you can legally decide where exactly someone can stay based on their race or skin color or heritage when they come to this country through normal customs. Those guys from Africa had actually begun studying before enlisting and the dude from Kenya is trying to become a commissioned officer in the Navy so that he can succeed as a doctor in the civilian life.

They're educated and regardless of their arrival (mind you both were not ones with humble backgrounds before enlisting).

In a populated country like this, 325.7 million people, in one of the largest countries in the world, with 4 different time zones, and a diverse society, everyone's experience is different and unique. Your race, heritage, and skin color doesn't decide how you end up.

Afterall, all of us Colombians in this section of Bigsoccer have all unique backgrounds into how our lives went and we were all different or similar in some ways.

Edit: forgot to stress this but you being treated differently is common in just about any culture that you're a foreigner in...hell even in the US being from a different city alone can make you be treated differently. It's nothing unique in the US...

 

So now NPR is also left wing propaganda? Seriously?

 

That study was made by the zionists. I wouldn't trust that

 

He didn't mean it for all Hispanics, he did said "and some I assume are good people"
He mean it for us white Hispanics . Right?
He " assumed "that some of us are good people and that's good enoughfor me

 

Okay, there is a problem with your logic; you're refusing to watch/read information that is provided to you especially when this guy making the video doesn't support Trump nor ever voted him like I didn't. And your argument saying that you refuse to listen to information just because you spent the last 2 years doing it doesn't excuse you; you're still taking the time to invest into a thread that you yourself made knowing full well that it was going to be a debate with others who agree and disagree with you. That is very hypocritical and cheap considering that debating with others that don't agree with you is part of human society itself. Whether or not you agree doesn't give you an excuse to not listen to them when bringing up arguments and explaining how something came to be. That's counterproductive.

Rationalize racism? Hold the ******** up because I've seen people on the Left do that in many forms and I've noticed it growing up as a liberal and seeing that same side blaming someone based on the color of their skin. Kinda like what you're doing with "white privilege" propaganda and this also related to the idea that you "can't be racist to white" people BS that is commonly affiliated with "white privilege". I am very curious to know what they said exactly that was rationalized racism and misogyny. Now I know that you can't prove that they said that but I am curious on your side of the story.

Also, you do realize that despite Obama's election and the obvious backlash that we did not have a reaction to his election in the same matter that we currently have with Trump right? Are there people who are racist? Of course, but you generalizing and merging racist people with those who didn't want him elected is the same thing that you hate whenever someone generalizes and uses propaganda about the democratic party. You know, the same party that founded the KKK and only a portion of them was against Slavery? Hell when I was in Atlanta during college and asking people why they also support Obama I was shocked at the fact that many of them only voted for him because he was black. It felt insulting to those of us who had legit reasons to vote for him and show just how biased people could be based on the color or background of someone. Hell, there were democrats didn't vote for him after all, they voted for other candidates to be representing their party but he still won even though many disliked him in his own party. It's the same on the Right where many of them disliked Trump. Ben Shapiro, for example, did not vote for Trump and does criticize the guy on many things but he defends him justifiability.

And Hillary....

ROFL

The fact that you think of her as a "qualified intelligent woman" is one of the funniest shit I've ever heard; she has such a bad background and terrible reputation that has had general various political parties go against her. Yes, this means even the Democrats disliked her. Yes, this is a real thing; you can easily youtube many videos breaking down why she was shunned by a large amount of Democrats. The only reason why they were on her side was that she became the candidate from their party. Hell this women insulted and generalize people who supported Trump, focused most of her campaign as a candidate discrediting Trump WITHOUT giving a valid argument as to why she was better and what changes she could give. She offered nothing and already had a bad history. There's no sympathy. Dude, that previous video with
Jonathan Pie himself, a guy who hates the idea of Trump being president and still prefers her to Trump was easily able to explain it easily despite his biased views.

How shit do you have to be to lose to Trump?

Not only he thinks that but generally everyone universally. "She's better than Trump? Sorry, that's not good enough of a reason" as to why people should have voted for her. No substance in her campagin. Hell many people believe that she bought the election to be a candidate.

"Off course, having the republicans push Benghazi and her-emails for all the election cycle did its job, not to mention that Russian interference and vote suppression in red states helped Trump win several key states, usually by the smallish numbers."

No shit it did its job; she already had a ********ing bad rep even amongst her own political party. Clinton has had a very dishonest background and this was the icing on the cake. Especially if it's the truth and part of evidence then of course they're going to use it to expose her.

Also, Russian Interference? WikiLeaks (you know the publisher of the emails with Pristine record) say it was Not the Russians. Also, the FBI and other agencies have contradicted the claim. And the Russians. And Trump. There has been Absolutely ZERO Evidence for it in the slightest. That stupid "17 agencies" report; all it said was "The method used looked similar with something Russian hackers did in the past' (paraphrasing).That's it. That is Nothing. The CIA should have said nothing until they had Hard evidence and are willing to show it. Otherwise why the hell would even Tip-off Putin? If this was true then Putin is already getting far too much information! The only thing this did was create panic. This isn't how any intelligence agency is supposed to act, especially in a transition. This is plainly absurd. No evidence the Russians were involved, equally, there's no evidence that it even had an effect. It's similar to how in Australia when they banned guns, people in the US used that as an argument as to why no guns work. This is an issue because gun violence was already going down and some local universities in Australia couldn't find the linking evidence that gun violence was going down because of no guns. I bring this up to show that while it's very possible that something can happen and be the truth even without evidence, it's hard to convince people otherwise.

If we overall get hard consistent collobrating evidence then I am all for it. The reason why I debating with you on this is because there's reasons to believe it otherwise just as others have reasons to believe it in the same matter. I can see why people don't believe that there was a Russian influence but also why people do believe that there is.

When the Mueller investigation results come out we will see how much actually Trump owes to Putin and how deep was Russia influence in the GOP campaign. The clearest sign was the flood of Russian money into the NRA that then generously contributed to GOP candidates.

Again, if the investigation does prove something then I won't deny it. I am open to actual evidence and I won't be a hypocrite and deny the evidence. I think that anyone here logically would agree if it is proved and there's collaborating evidence then you have to go off of said evidence.

Also, of course, the NRA are; Republicans are pro guns so naturally, it's a natural interest mutually.

The issue with mediabiaschart is that people can vote on it;

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/npr/

You can contribute to the view. This is common as it's better to look at a media's source of content and how they approach the subject and how critical they can be. CNN and Fox, for example, doesn't require some website to see how it's biased; anyone can tell. And CNN is WAYYYY more left than what this chart says.

 

Obviously not the ones he's talking about. Seriously dude, that's cheap to pretend that he's generalizing. It's kinda like how people assume all black people are criminals, all Latinos are poor, all Asians are nerdy elitist, and all white people are racist. That tactic is used on both sides and frankly, that type of shit is just bad.

 

You arent white but racist for example


Just kidding

 

Video evidence helps. Not calling this fake at all~

Of course mind you the US does have better systems for rights than Cuba... Blockage? What are they referring to specifically?

While I don't agree with the debt going higher and higher because I hate seeing that, that happens wayyyyyy too much with these presidents...I say this because I do agree with you that it's stupid and irresponsible. Frankly, I like understand this more and more before giving my opinion. Same for any of the previous presidents.

 

I do hope that if you legitimately think that I am a racist, that you will let me know. Lol.