4 ms·

Do you really believe what you posted? If tomorrow he says something to disprove one of your points, you will further twist your argument to somehow appears as

Do you really believe what you posted? If tomorrow he says something to disprove one of your points, you will further twist your argument to somehow appears as if he is still doing the right thing. I don't think anyone but yourself can convince you of what is really going on.

cookiecaper 10y ago
I have no position on whether or not President Trump's order is "the right thing". I am merely saying that he is seriously, but not literally, fulfilling the promises he made during the campaign. That's what the comment I was replying to was discussing. Trump has not literally banned Muslims, nor has he literally begun construction on a wall that rivals the Great Wall of China (and indications are that he doesn't intend something so permanent/marring, but that he does intend to build a secure perimeter along the southern border). If tomorrow he does literally fulfill some promises, that's probably fine, as surely some promises were literal (maybe the ones about government-paid child care?).
- siidooloo 10y ago
  You're doing a lot of arguing For someone who has no position on it.
  - cookiecaper 10y ago
    Self-indulgent arguments over technicalities have been a lifelong thing for me. My dad always told me I should be a lawyer. ;) Seriously though, it matters because people are trying to pretend that there is some extraordinary abrogation of law, precedent, or process here, when indeed there hasn't been. There's just a bunch of malicious people with a megaphone trying to scare other people so that those people will be duped into doing their dirty work, which has a real potential to grow not just disorderly, but violent. I really don't know much about whether President Obama's immigration orders were wise or not either, but I would've made equally self-indulgent arguments in his favor if people were also trying to incite mass panic over it.

cookiecaper 10y ago

I have no position on whether or not President Trump's order is "the right thing". I am merely saying that he is seriously, but not literally, fulfilling the promises he made during the campaign. That's what the comment I was replying to was discussing. Trump has not literally banned Muslims, nor has he literally begun construction on a wall that rivals the Great Wall of China (and indications are that he doesn't intend something so permanent/marring, but that he does intend to build a secure perimeter along the southern border). If tomorrow he does literally fulfill some promises, that's probably fine, as surely some promises were literal (maybe the ones about government-paid child care?).

siidooloo 10y ago
You're doing a lot of arguing For someone who has no position on it.
- cookiecaper 10y ago
  Self-indulgent arguments over technicalities have been a lifelong thing for me. My dad always told me I should be a lawyer. ;) Seriously though, it matters because people are trying to pretend that there is some extraordinary abrogation of law, precedent, or process here, when indeed there hasn't been. There's just a bunch of malicious people with a megaphone trying to scare other people so that those people will be duped into doing their dirty work, which has a real potential to grow not just disorderly, but violent. I really don't know much about whether President Obama's immigration orders were wise or not either, but I would've made equally self-indulgent arguments in his favor if people were also trying to incite mass panic over it.