Over half of U.S. states rejecting refugees
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-11-2015, 11:33 AM
RE: Over half of U.S. states rejecting refugees
(18-11-2015 11:24 AM)yakherder Wrote:  
(18-11-2015 11:08 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  "...actually EFFECT some kind of change."

Not trying to be a dick, the affect/effect thing bugs the shit out of me.

I try to be good with grammar, so if I used it incorrectly I sincerely apologize. My understanding is that affect is a verb, right now change is not happening and I want to change that, therefore I affect change. The only college I went to was in China so, if I am mistaken, then oops.

Yeah, hang your head in abject shame. Smile

"I can effect change by working for a successful political campaign, thereby affecting the kind of legislation that is passed.
The effect will be better laws which will affect everyone."

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
18-11-2015, 11:33 AM (This post was last modified: 18-11-2015 11:39 AM by Thumpalumpacus.)
RE: Over half of U.S. states rejecting refugees
(18-11-2015 11:09 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  Not fighting ISIS with boots on the ground is strike 3.

After 13 years of troops fighting in Southwest Asia, the American public seems to think that neither war was worth the blood and treasure:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/167471/americ...stake.aspx

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/most-america...osts-poll/

Keeping troops out of the Syrian debacle is not just sound foreign policy, it's good domestic politics, apparently.

I disagree with your point about ACA, too.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
18-11-2015, 11:35 AM
RE: Over half of U.S. states rejecting refugees
(18-11-2015 11:31 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(18-11-2015 11:24 AM)yakherder Wrote:  I try to be good with grammar, so if I used it incorrectly I sincerely apologize. My understanding is that affect is a verb, right now change is not happening and I want to change that, therefore I affect change. The only college I went to was in China so, if I am mistaken, then oops.

I think both affect and effect could be used here but for the opposite of what HeWhoHerdsYaks says. If there is no change happening "effect" is correct to bring it about. If change is already occurring "affect" is correct to manipulate and alter the change already happening. ... Goddam it. Apparently I'm as pedantic as the BeardedClam.

Fair enough. The way I read it was to effect change. It's pedantic but after enough times of having my work ripped apart by editors revising my wording and grammar, some of it sinks in. Tongue

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
18-11-2015, 11:36 AM
RE: Over half of U.S. states rejecting refugees
(18-11-2015 11:12 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  
(18-11-2015 11:04 AM)yakherder Wrote:  Help the refugees, shoot the jihadists in the face. Whether it happens here or over there is irrelevant to me. I did spend some time in a refugee camp ~15 years back, and my memory of it still doesn't sit well with me. That plays a part in my own decision making process. As for everyone else, my suggestion is if you feel that strongly about a cause, act on it. Most of you are more concerned about backing up your liberal/conservative affiliation than you are about finding a way to actually affect some kind of change.


Okay. I think we share the same agenda. Thumbsup Thanks for sharing.

I'm sure your memory of a refugee camp doesn't sit well with you. That is what people need to hear about. When we say we won't accept refugees, where do we think they will go? Trump says Syria has a lot of wonderful sand, why don't we built them a safe place in the desert? (Yes...he said that). Refugee camps, from an outsider's perspective, are rife with disease, theft, murder, rape, child molesting, and Radicalization. The Jews who were turned away from North American shores went back to Germany to be exterminated. The Syrians who are turned away will what? Be murdered, raped, and radicalized? Probably. This needs to be taken into account when we talk about keeping people out. We're not talking hypotheticals. We are talking about individual human beings who have just as much right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as any white North American does.

I just get frustrated sometimes once an issue goes red vs. blue because, once that happens, rational dialogue is pretty much an impossibility. And in this situation, we need that. I want to help, and I intend to do just that. But at the same time we can't ignore the risks. Jihadists will slip through the cracks. It's a statistic inevitability. I don't want to let that fear control my actions, but I don't want to have a situation where problems are swept under the carpet because anyone who brings them up is vilified.

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes yakherder's post
18-11-2015, 11:37 AM
RE: Over half of U.S. states rejecting refugees
(18-11-2015 11:28 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(18-11-2015 11:27 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  Actually, the Federal government has a couple of options available:

1) they can coerce state co-operation by withholding other funds to states which refuse to do as the Feds wish (this is how the drinking age was raised to 21 nationwide, and how 55mph limits were gotten in 1974: by witholding highway funding to states which didn't do as the Feds wished). Never forget, the Feds have not only the power of the purse, but the power of the money press. If the Feds pull funding, states cannot simply print money to pay their way.

2) They can settle them on Federal land using Federal assets.

They'd need the power of the Republican controlled Congress to do #1. They control the budget.

No, they wouldn't. The Congress apportions the funds; the Executive branch doles them out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
18-11-2015, 11:37 AM
RE: Over half of U.S. states rejecting refugees
This.

(18-11-2015 11:36 AM)yakherder Wrote:  I don't want to let that fear control my actions, but I don't want to have a situation where problems are swept under the carpet because anyone who brings them up is vilified.

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Erxomai's post
18-11-2015, 11:40 AM
RE: Over half of U.S. states rejecting refugees
(18-11-2015 11:36 AM)yakherder Wrote:  
(18-11-2015 11:12 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  Okay. I think we share the same agenda. Thumbsup Thanks for sharing.

I'm sure your memory of a refugee camp doesn't sit well with you. That is what people need to hear about. When we say we won't accept refugees, where do we think they will go? Trump says Syria has a lot of wonderful sand, why don't we built them a safe place in the desert? (Yes...he said that). Refugee camps, from an outsider's perspective, are rife with disease, theft, murder, rape, child molesting, and Radicalization. The Jews who were turned away from North American shores went back to Germany to be exterminated. The Syrians who are turned away will what? Be murdered, raped, and radicalized? Probably. This needs to be taken into account when we talk about keeping people out. We're not talking hypotheticals. We are talking about individual human beings who have just as much right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as any white North American does.

I just get frustrated sometimes once an issue goes red vs. blue because, once that happens, rational dialogue is pretty much an impossibility. And in this situation, we need that. I want to help, and I intend to do just that. But at the same time we can't ignore the risks. Jihadists will slip through the cracks. It's a statistic inevitability. I don't want to let that fear control my actions, but I don't want to have a situation where problems are swept under the carpet because anyone who brings them up is vilified.

It's not about vilifying based on political ideologies, it is about asking why there is a bend one way or the other that is correlated with political leaning.

The issue should be discussed, but pointing out the political divide isn't what shuts the conversation down. The conversation is often times an illusion, where one or both parties enter with no intention of having a real dialogue.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
18-11-2015, 11:40 AM
RE: Over half of U.S. states rejecting refugees
(18-11-2015 11:28 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(18-11-2015 11:27 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  Actually, the Federal government has a couple of options available:

1) they can coerce state co-operation by withholding other funds to states which refuse to do as the Feds wish (this is how the drinking age was raised to 21 nationwide, and how 55mph limits were gotten in 1974: by witholding highway funding to states which didn't do as the Feds wished). Never forget, the Feds have not only the power of the purse, but the power of the money press. If the Feds pull funding, states cannot simply print money to pay their way.

2) They can settle them on Federal land using Federal assets.

They'd need the power of the Republican controlled Congress to do #1. They control the budget.

Since ICE is the department that is responsible for resettlement they would have to defund ICE at the very time they are looking to ICE to deport 11 million wet backs. Seems like a quandary to me.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
18-11-2015, 11:44 AM
RE: Over half of U.S. states rejecting refugees
(18-11-2015 11:37 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(18-11-2015 11:28 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  They'd need the power of the Republican controlled Congress to do #1. They control the budget.

No, they wouldn't. The Congress apportions the funds; the Executive branch doles them out.

Apparently, the federal government is prohibited from doing this after a 2012 supreme Court ruling.

http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2013/12/...-doctrine/

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-11-2015, 11:47 AM
RE: Over half of U.S. states rejecting refugees
(18-11-2015 08:34 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  It's easy to spot patriotism and national pride. Democrats are less likely to display it, or feel it. Republicans and southerners are much more enthusiastic about being an American and are more likely to display it.

My national pride has taken quite a hit these last few years.

Since 9/11/2001 my country has:

Established a system of secret courts to try terrorists in the name of national security.

Passed the Patriot Act which violates civil rights in more ways than I care to think about.

Agents from our country have entered foreign countries, kidnapped foreign citizens, and transported them secretly to other foreign countries. Once there, those nationals where held in secret prisons, without charge or trial, and tortured.

Let me state that clearly: WE TORTURED PEOPLE.
Every fascist government in history has had secret prisons, secret trials, torture and the sacrifice of human rights. All in the name of national security and safety.

We started the Iraq war, invading a sovereign nation on flimsy evidence that was later conclusively proven false. The civilian death toll is conservatively estimated at 70,000+ and is likely far, far higher.

Corporations made hundreds of billions of dollars profiting from the Iraq war and in doing so committed even more atrocities.

Then, when we got tired of fighting we took our toys and went home leaving a fledging and unstable puppet state to deal with our mess. This resulted in near civil war, turmoil and the creation of ISIS.

My country has done nothing to intervene in the Syrian civil war. Despite the atrocities committed by IS and the Syrian government on their own people, we have done nothing.

And in Afghanistan, it is now coming to light that the US was complicit in the torture and murder of innocent civilians. Since the bodies are buried right outside our former bases, our troops had to be at least aware, if not involved.

And the current winner: the Syrian Refugee Crisis.
The Syrians have had numerous atrocities heaped on them by their own government as well as ISIS. They have been bombed, abducted, tortured, raped, murdered and driven out of their homes. Forced to flee they have been abandoned by human traffickers, and ignored or turned away by many countries.

We in the US, one of the wealthiest countries on the planet, with vast resources, an abundance of food, money and living space, we have done... Nothing.




So, no I don't fly an American flag.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Fatbaldhobbit's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: