Watch Me Grow


#1

I know little about politics, so I’m doing an experiment. Basically, I’m going down the lists of political pundits on Google, and then I’m going down the list of political topics under the polls tab on isidewith.com. The first political pundit I randomly chose was Glenn Beck and the first topic happens to be the Trump border wall.

I find and critique each article and video where Glenn Beck talks about the wall or someone’s talking about Glenn Beck talking about the wall. (which is only 1)

I got kicked off of another forum for this. I was hoping this community will be more open to me posting this. So far, I’ve done 75 article and video critiques on 19 different political pundits. Some of the earlier ones that I critiqued, I wrote some ignorant things, but I didn’t change them because the whole point of this experiment is learning on the way.

I’ll post frequently, especially given the fact that I’ve already done 75 article and video critiques. WARNING: I get offensive at times. So if you get triggered, don’t read these. Note: I am not as ignoring now as I was 75 critiques ago, but still feel free to tear me apart on anything I write.

This is the very first one I did. It’s the shortest and the worst. Hopefully you get the idea. I type out the dialogue if it’s audio or video for the first 60 or so critiques. Feel free to ask if you have any questions, because I know it’s confusing haha.
Glenn Beck - Trump’s Border Wall


This Is A Bit Of Fun If Answered Honestly
#2

Good stuff. This is one community that I’ve found that doesn’t get triggered about getting triggered. No trigger warnings. Just do your thing and say what you want to say.


#4

Is this some kind of money making thing for you? Just curious about your angle.


#5

No, not at all. I just enjoy doing it and I have fun just saying whatever comments I want in these critiques. I don’t have to be scared and I can oppose whoever. Liberal or Conservative. Nobody has read any of them, so I thought, “hey, maybe 1 or 2 people will find this slightly interesting, informative, or entertaining, so I’ll find somewhere online to post it.”


#6

Why not use pastebin for something like this? Google requires an email address to view these documents…at least on my mobile. I dismiss the notification because I don’t share that information.


#7

Or…why not just post the analysis here? Most of us aren’t big fans of Google.


#8

I critique using red text within the article I am going over so it’s easy to distinguish between the article and what I’m commenting on. Not in the first 2 that I posted, but after that. I couldn’t get Pastebin to do that for me. I also have them all saved into Google Docs. I like how it organizes my files and I didn’t realize a lot of people on here aren’t fans of Google.

Especially in my later breakdowns, I use pictures, videos, and titles sometimes even to illustrate a point. So if you just click the link it won’t work? I logged out of my Google and Freebird account on my mobile and I still was able to open the link. Is it not working for other people?


#9

I use an Android so anything Google related doesn’t give me an option to read anonymously. I have to select my Gmail account to do it. That might be want people are talking about. It’s Christmas and I’m still with fam but I can check on my desktop later.

We all use markdown here to format (some better than others) so I don’t see why formatting it here would be a problem. I mean - you want people to talk about your analysis. Well we post our analysis and views here for people to talk about. So as a new guy to our community you should work the way we work here. We don’t post things in Google docs that people have to go read and then come back to comment on. I’ve taken plenty of stuff from pastebin or other sources and worked to format it here.

Look at what @GodEmperor did - he formatted for the community. He didn’t just link out somewhere.

If you want to learn how to format for freebird check out markdown basics like this

# This is a heading
## This is a smaller heading 
### This is an even smaller heading
**This is BOLD**
_How About Italics?_
* bullet
* bullet 
* bullet 

This is a heading

This is a smaller heading

This is an even smaller heading

This is BOLD
How About Italics?

  • bullet
  • bullet
  • bullet

If that’s too difficult to do with what you have already done then give a tl;dr (quick rundown) a link and explain what you want people to do with your stuff…do you want their opinions or do you want to debate? Also…if you are new to forums. Lurk more. You won’t find out how this place works on Christmas night because most people are hanging with the fam. Just saying.

Oh yeah…here is a markdown cheat sheet. @Patriot sent this out a while back. This is his house and we are guests here.

https://github.com/adam-p/markdown-here/wiki/Markdown-Cheatsheet


#11

This is what you guys want. I rip apart this feminist lady’s article. My writing is in bold italics and her’s is in regular format. Honestly, I just have fun commenting throughout the article. Here’s the link to the original article: Sarah’s Irrational Rant

Ugh, here we go.

Sarah Posner: Sanctuary Cities- December 25, 2017
Sarah probably hates Christmas.
Written by Sarah Posner herself on website rollingstone.com
Published January 2017
From skimming, Sarah is obviously against Trump’s initial immigration plans. Initial LOL

Written article starts,

President Trump is spending his first full week in office fulfilling his campaign promises to his nativist base. Just say you don’t want to secure our borders. Just say you’re an advocate of open borders. You’re playing political charades here. The only difference is, instead of not speaking, you hint at open borders in most of what you write, but don’t explicitly write it out. On Wednesday, he signed two executive orders during a visit to the Department of Homeland Security that together will require construction of a border wall, increased border patrol, intensified crackdowns on undocumented immigrants and withdrawal of federal funds to so-called sanctuary cities that protect undocumented immigrants from deportation. You’re saying that like it’s a bad thing. Oh…you are. Okay.

Condemnation of the orders from immigration reform advocates and civil liberties groups has been swift and harsh. As expected. Thomas A. Saenz, president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, calls the orders “alt-right, dog-whistle executive directives” that would have a “long-term cost to the soul and safety of our nation.” Such a beautiful execution of pretty much saying nothing.

What’s more, advocates say, the orders are a solution in search of a problem. I won’t deny the fact that the right blow it up more than what it is. Especially crime. Contrary to Trump’s portrayal of a surge of undocumented immigrants crossing the border unabated, net migration from Mexico “is at its lowest point in history,” says Janet Murguía, president of the National Council of La Raza. Cough cough Obama Cough cough Building the wall, in addition to being ineffective, is a “grave symbolic error for a country that has always been a beacon of freedom to the world,” she says. Shouldn’t you like, reverse that sentence emphasizing on why the wall is ineffective?

Trump has further provoked a confrontation with Mexico by insisting that he can force it to pay for the wall – after American taxpayers have footed the bill. Funniest moment in political history right there when he said that. Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, who has said Mexico will not, in fact, pay for the wall, announced Thursday morning that he had canceled a scheduled meeting at the White House next week.

Adding to the alarm over the two executive orders Trump signed Wednesday is a leaked draft of a third executive order that that appears to be a version of Trump’s promised Muslim ban. According to the leaked draft, that order would institute an immediate, four-month halt to the entry of refugees, an end to the Syrian refugee resettlement program, and restrictions on the entry of people traveling or immigrating from countries the draft order calls “of particular concern.” It also calls for the collection of information about “foreign-born individuals” in the United States, which could include naturalized U.S. citizens. I’m curious to your opinion on what that means. Oh……you’re not going to give it. Okay. The White House has not said whether or when Trump will sign the order, or some version of it.

While many advocates are not commenting on the document while it is still in draft, others are reacting to the possibility that Trump will sign it or something like it. You should probably listen to the many advocates. Just sayin’. Mark Hetfield, president of HIAS – founded in 1881 to assist Jews fleeing persecution in Eastern Europe and Russia, and now actively resettling Syrian refugees He must have a great argument. I mean, he’s a hero. – calls the draft order “obscene,” “offensive” and “an outrage.”

“It’s unbelievable,” Hetfield says, that the leaked draft is being circulated the same week as Holocaust Remembrance Day, which falls on Friday. “The irony must be lost on him, but the entire Refugee Convention came out of the ashes of the Holocaust, and he’s abdicating American responsibility when it comes to refugees. It’s disgusting.” Bummer.

Trump even faces criticism from a core segment of his base: evangelicals. Scott Arbeiter, president of World Relief, the humanitarian arm of the National Association of Evangelicals, which also resettles refugees, calls the draft order an “overreaction” that “further traumatizes the very people who are running from the terror we’re trying to stop.” Haha you would think it has been passed for a few months now by how she writes about it, but it’s still in draft!

Reacting to language in the leaked draft that “the United States should not admit those who engage in acts of bigotry and hatred America feeds off bigotry. You feed off of bigotry Sarah. … or those who would oppress members of one race, one gender, or sexual orientation,” Ingrid Mattson, a prominent Muslim leader and academic, asked on Twitter, “What will he do about the Americans who do this?” Great point to bring up, but they’re still denying the fact that there are radical Muslims out there. Oh, it’s a very small percentage? Okay, well I’ll let her argue those facts instead of playing devil’s advocate.

Such questions appear to be of little consequence to the new president, who spoke at the immigration order signing at DHS with the same dog-whistles that energized his base from the start of his campaign. He never even mentioned doing anything to Muslim Americans. Stop blowing things out of proportion that haven’t even been said. There’s no fucking middle ground to these articles. They’re either stupid and simple as fuck or complicated and hard to analyze….as hell. He portrayed an America under siege from an endless flow of terror and crime across the border, and pledged to “restore the rule of law in the United States.”

“Beginning today, the United States of America gets back control of its borders,” he said, (gay voice) Jeeze, stop giving me these confident and powerful Trump quotes. Getting me all enerchgized. What side do you want me on Shsarah? praising Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Custom Enforcement agents, and calling DHS “a law enforcement agency.”

Laws, said Trump ominously, “will be enforced, and enforced strongly.” Cold as ICE.

La Raza’s Murguía says that by “setting in motion a mass deportation force” and punishing cities that protect the undocumented from deportation, Trump is creating the “potential to unleash a lot of chaos and fear.” Yeah, a lot of people who didn’t take the proper procedures to enter this country.

Sanctuary cities, she says, contrary to Trump’s insinuations, do not harbor criminals. Okay, maybe Fox News blew this thing out of proportion, but don’t tell me a city with millions of people doesn’t harbor any illegal criminal immigrants. That’s just illogical. With the executive order threatening to withhold federal funds from cities that refuse to turn over undocumented residents to immigration authorities, Trump is attempting to force local police to become part of his immigration force, seeking out and turning over undocumented residents even if they have not been convicted of a crime. So for example, if an undocumented immigrant gets pulled over for a busted tail light and doesn’t have a driver’s license. Because if you’re in Lansing, Michigan, for example, you’re most likely not going to have a driver’s license. Do you know why? Because only 12 states allow undocumented immigrants to receive driver’s license’ and Michigan isn’t one of them. Where is the argument that there’s a bunch of illegals out there who are driving without passing an official driver’s test required by federal law? Yes, I’m sure many of them take transportation……but still! Guess where I discovered that fact? A fucking Jorge Ramos documentary! Just kinda slipped out. Fucking hell. These provisions are likely to provoke litigation by localities against the federal government. She’s right. She is so right about this. She is so right it’s ridiculous and I’m not being sarcastic.

Trump’s actions also are having an immediate effect on residents of border communities. In the Rio Grande Valley in Texas, close to the Mexico border, people are “terrified,” says Michael Seifert, the coordinator for the Rio Grande Valley Equal Voice Network, a community organizing group that works with and advocates for immigrants. “Hey man, I’m with you. I advocate for immigrants. I hate that Trump guy. I mean, they’re citizens too ya know? They did their papers and we already told them they could come……Oh so we’re advocating for the ones who came here without signin’ the papers? Aren’t they like, not supposed to do that? Why did you just say immigrants then? I’m confused.” It really does more harm than good when you don’t specify what the fuck you’re talking about.

Residents fear the coming intensified crackdown, says Seifert, as they are already subject to questioning from the Customs and Border Control agents patrolling their communities. “Subject to questioning.” Oh what a broad term. Seifert and other advocates point to deaths and injuries to residents at the hands of border control agents; the Southern Borders Community Coalition, which maintains data on these incidents, says that 46 people have died “as the result of an encounter with U.S. border agents” since 2010. Unjustified deaths? That’s like saying Rob O’Neill killed a guy in Pakistan without mentioning that guy happened to be Osama bin Laden. You’re audience must be retarded or something. I gotta stop talking like that, because I’m retarded. I’m just not brainwashed. An October 2016 investigation in The Guardian documented the increasing militarization of border control, and how it has led to abuses. I’ve just accepted the fact that this woman doesn’t have a firm grasp of reality, yet she’s profiting greatly off of it. Just a fact.

One of the executive orders Trump signed Wednesday calls for hiring 5,000 additional border control officers, and orders the DHS secretary to “allocate all legally available resources to immediately construct, operate, control, or establish contracts to construct, operate, or control facilities to detain aliens at or near the land border with Mexico.” The other requires the hiring of an additional 10,000 immigration officers.

“Expanding the size and power of security forces in the border area,” says Southern Borders Community Coalition Director Christian Ramirez in a statement, “will further erode the freedoms and rights of tens of millions of people who call the southern border communities home.” If I found a hobo in my basement who called my basement home, I would kick him out regardless of race or where he’s from. If I lived with 2 other people in a 4 bedroom house with room for another roommate who contributes, I’ll accept anyone who seems cool and has a job regardless of race, sex (if they’re comfortable with it. I wouldn’t ask first) religion, (unless a radical Muslim) or where they are from as long as they sign the lease. It’s not that simple, but it’s that simple.

Trump’s plans and threats to detain more undocumented immigrants, says Vicki Gaubeca, director for the Regional Center for Border Rights at the ACLU of New Mexico, “benefit no one except private prison operators and politicians trying to score some political point.” There’s definitely some truth to that I’m sure.

Seifert cites an instance of a mother, who was undocumented, being picked up by border control as she walked her children to school, and subsequently deported.

“A family split up on a school day,” he says. “That happens all the time.” It’s like we learned when we were 2 years old. Actions have consequences.

Now, with Trump’s orders, he adds, “there’s a generalized fear across the community” of agents who are “already out of control.” Tana vs. Idubbbz

Other civil liberties advocates say millions more fear increased profiling and intimidation at the internal checkpoints, located within 100 miles of the Mexico border, that are intended to catch undocumented immigrants as they travel.

Gaubeca says the ACLU has “heard a lot of complaints from Latino and Hispanic families who have lived here for generation that they feel like they are being profiled at the checkpoints.” It’s hard not to given that most of illegal immigrants are Latino and Hispanic families. But I don’t believe people should be searched based on their appearance, unless their appearance is being drunk or high. They should have a probable cause.

She adds that these checkpoints nonetheless have been ineffective at catching undocumented immigrants. “Less than one percent of people detained for being undocumented are detained at internal checkpoints,” she says.

At his DHS appearance, though, Trump’s attention is on pushing false, fear-mongering claims about undocumented immigrants’ supposed propensity to criminality. That doesn’t even sound hard to believe, but you’re not giving me anything of substance Sarah. I wish I could see how bad of a guy Trump is if he is. I want to if he is, but all I see is FAKE NEWS. He has on hand members of the Remembrance Project, a group that draws attention to the family members of people murdered by undocumented immigrants. Since the summer of 2015, Trump has exploited the tragic stories of the Remembrance Project as purported evidence of the need for an immigration crackdown. I mean, she’s being a hypocrite, but everyone’s a hypocrite. She’s right about this if it’s anything like they do on Fox News.

But in the weeks after Trump’s 2015 presidential campaign announcement, the Washington Post concluded that Trump had made “false comments connecting Mexican immigrants and crime.” I like the Washington Post. I’ll go ahead and say it now so it’s out there. The data, the newspaper’s fact-checker concluded, “are not indicative of general crime trends of non-citizens,” citing Congressional Research Service findings that “the vast majority of unauthorized immigrants do not fit in the category that fits Trump’s description: aggravated felons, whose crimes include murder, drug trafficking or illegal trafficking of firearms.” Yep. He probably wouldn’t have won if he didn’t use these over exaggerations. Just like Sarah Posner wouldn’t be successful if she gave an actual argument and instead of using victimhood and misguided verbiage. 95% of the time she doesn’t use an actual argument anyways, citing from an actual journalist who gives facts. You know, substance.

From his border town, Seifert also counters Trump’s claims about increased crime caused by undocumented immigrants. He says Brownsville, Harlingen and McAllen, the largest towns in the Rio Grande Valley, are safe communities, and that rather than fearing crime from undocumented immigrants, residents fear border control officers who might profile them, detain them or tear their families apart. And still use the same argument whether guilty or not.

In the wake of the executive orders, Seifert says his organization is helping residents prepare as if for a natural disaster, assembling “very practical survival methods,” including provisions for what will happen to their children if they are separated. And he should. They should be prepared.

“We do it during hurricane season – now we’re doing it for border control season,” he says. “It’s not a normal life.” Sounds like he cares about the people and I respect that.

My Response:

_*1st Impression: Disagreeing with Sarah- She’s an activist. It’s sad what that word has devolved down into. This is an example of political propaganda. This is very misguided. If I read this not knowing anything about the US and Mexico, I’d think, “Wow. That Trump guy is as bad as Hitler!” **

__Luckily, I know enough to call bullshit on this article. I think the only time I agreed with her was when she was talking about Trump exploiting victims to help him score political points. UGH. Of course it was cited from another web article. Not like someone who actually did the research to find people who did the statistics, but just read another article that did the research and just copied them. It’s basically gossiping on a journalistic level. It’s not cool. Bitch.

Trump is doing the right thing. I don’t like when he exploited those families, but I still agree with his motives. Not everything can be perfect I guess.


#12

Don’t be a drama queen about it. Make your life easier and use the block quote. Text in block quote by using > just like on cuckchan (green text). Block quote the original work and write your OC underneath. I will do this on everything I feel like responding to.

Most people are too stupid to realize what globalists want. They try to package it as diversity and tolerance but it’s really cultural genocide.

Actually they are saying a lot. Take a closer look.

They are saying that preventing illegals from freely entering the country and strutting around like the own the place will negatively impact the safety and culture of Americans. We know this to be a big load of stinky shit but people who don’t research how toxic this problem is actually believe shit like this is gospel. Know your enemy.

I don’t think Sanctuary Cities have been given enough attention. Your federal tax dollars are literally being sent to cities that refuse to comply with Federal law. You try breaking federal law then asking to be paid in advance to do it again.

Kate Steinle would still be alive today if that illegal mongrel was detained. How many more Kate Steinle murders are you willing to take?

Fuck that. If I see a dirtbag Muslim walking around a highly populated area and he looks out of place, I want him searched. Same for filthy vagrant looking Mexicans wandering around high class areas. They don’t belong there. Search them, detain them, and then deport them. It’s that simple.


#13

Haha! Now that’s what I’m fuckin’ talking about.


#14

Just to comment on the Kate Steinle point you made, Republicans use poor 'ol Kate like Liberals used the kids who were killed in Sandy Hook. Like Ben Shapiro said, “You’re standing on the graves of the children of Sandy Hook. Saying that you don’t care enough about the dead kids. If they cared more about the dead kids, they’d agree with you on policy.” I’m actually on your side about immigration Honky. I just hate when Republicans pull the same shit liberals do without even realizing it. It’s exactly the same, except different deaths for different politics.

In my comment I said “There’s definitely SOME truth to that.” I’m just acknowledging the fact that detaining more undocumented immigrants probably would benefit private prison operators and politicians trying to score political points. I won’t deny the fact that there’s some truth to that statement. That’s why I didn’t say, “Oh yeah, I agree.”


#15

It may appear that way on paper but the fact is one is about the crime and the other about the implement. In Kate’s case the person should have never been in the country to commit the crime in the other, the ‘right’ to keep and bear arms is a written provision within the constitution. While some may disapprove of guns, the issue of gun rights was not a feature in the Steinle case even though a firearm was used, it was the perpetrators presence in the US against the immigration laws of the country. The hoopla over the Sandy Hook incident wasn’t at all about the person and indeed the use of children was really only a prop used by people who just don’t like guns but are powerless to change the Constitution… In the Sandy Hook case, it wasn’t about the crime that was committed or indeed its prevention but strictly about the implement used.


#16

Great point. I didn’t think of it that way.

Still, I do think using Kate vs. using hard hitting statistics shouldn’t be the right way to make a case against illegal immigration. If someone if pro immigration, dreamers, or whatever, I think it’s counterproductive to say, “What about the girl who died? Huh? Are you glad she died?” Other than, “Look at the crime rate in this sanctuary city vs. the crime rate in this city that isn’t a sanctuary city.”

Now I’m not saying to not even mention the death of Kate Steinle. I just don’t believe it should be the main focus of the argument.


#17

Liberals are a funny, if not impossible lot to argue with. Statistics mean little to a progressive unless it can make a point in their favor. They attack subjects from a subjective and emotional point of view… Take guns for instance. the number of gun crimes committed verse the number of guns owned is miniscule but the use of things like Sandy Hook validate their position, so they use it rather than statistics. Black on Black crime statistics mean nothing to BLM nor do black crime vs white crime which police which put police in potentially lethal situations.

Using Kate’s case is an example and a lightning point for creating new law… Kates Law isn’t JUST about Kate, its about the aggregate crime committed by people who are not legally welcomed into this country. It isn’t unlike the Amber Alert… It was a law in her name but was about the wider problem of child abduction. I think that picking Kate Steinle’s case to base this issue around was a master stroke of luck… not only is it glaringly obvious that liberals are shielding people who have no permission to be in this country… with regard to the outcome of the case, we can see a left coast judiciary dispensing bad justice in the name of their pro immigration bias…