How many questions can an illegal immigration advocate answer?

You might need a piece of paper to keep track of the questions, but no paper is necessary to keep track of the answers he gives.

This is just stunning... and don't think for a minute it is unusual, because it isn't... it's the norm.




.

Grim17 said:

You might need a piece of paper to keep track of the questions, but no paper is necessary to keep track of the answers he gives.

This is just stunning... and don't think for a minute it is unusual, because it isn't... it's the norm.




.

Click to expand...

Tucker is such a ****ing moron, lol.

Good lord.

The questions that this guy avoids are stupid questions. Sanctuary city policies are either good or bad and hav nothing to do with bull**** questions like "whats a good number of illegals?" or "What do you think of what this lady said?"

He asked stupid questions and the guy avoided them. When he was wrong or asked good questions they guy answered them or cited a study showing that Tucker is a ****ing moron.

Is there some sort of mental block in the head of progressives that stops them from grasping the difference between illegal immigrants and legal immigrants? Saying the US is a nation of immigrants when talking about illegal immigrants is retarded.

roughdraft274 said:

Tucker is such a ****ing moron, lol.

Good lord.

The questions that this guy avoids are stupid questions. Sanctuary city policies are either good or bad and hav nothing to do with bull**** questions like "whats a good number of illegals?" or "What do you think of what this lady said?"

He asked stupid questions and the guy avoided them. When he was wrong or asked good questions they guy answered them or cited a study showing that Tucker is a ****ing moron.

Click to expand...

I would like for you to elaborate... You mention the questions are stupid... but you don't mention why? Does that make your reply stupid? because it is absent of any explanation of your opinion?.... all you're doing is calling people names.

Who is the stupid one I wonder :doh

celticwar17 said:

I would like for you to elaborate... You mention the questions are stupid... but you don't mention why? Does that make your reply stupid? because it is absent of any explanation of your opinion?.... all you're doing is calling people names.

Who is the stupid one I wonder :doh

Click to expand...

roughdraft274 said:

Tucker is such a ****ing moron, lol.

Good lord.

The questions that this guy avoids are stupid questions. Sanctuary city policies are either good or bad and hav nothing to do with bull**** questions like "whats a good number of illegals?" or "What do you think of what this lady said?"

He asked stupid questions and the guy avoided them. When he was wrong or asked good questions they guy answered them or cited a study showing that Tucker is a ****ing moron.

Click to expand...

I pointed out why they are stupid. It wasn't a long post so I'm not quite sure how you managed to miss it. Like I said, asking someone for the exact number of how many illegals he thinks is ok in this country has nothing to do with "whats the right policy for the ones that are currently here" which is what the guy was arguing for. You should probably read what someone posts before commenting on it. Let me know if I can help you in any way to understand what I'm saying.

Henrin said:

Is there some sort of mental block in the head of progressives that stops them from grasping the difference between illegal immigrants and legal immigrants? Saying the US is a nation of immigrants when talking about illegal immigrants is retarded.

Click to expand...

Is there some mental block that prevents you that if the only thing bad about illegal immigrants is the fact that their illegal we could solve that problem by making them legal?

Conservatives pathetic attempt to pretend they only hate illegal immigrants is such obvious racist bull**** we don't wast our time on it. If we had the same simple tests today to determine if someone could enter the country legally that we had during the founding of this country there would be no such thing as illegal immigration. There would be no point in trying to sneak into the country because virtually every single solitary person that could get here was allowed in.

MrWonka said:

Is there some mental block that prevents you that if the only thing bad about illegal immigrants is the fact that their illegal we could solve that problem by making them legal?

Conservatives pathetic attempt to pretend they only hate illegal immigrants is such obvious racist bull**** we don't wast our time on it. If we had the same simple tests today to determine if someone could enter the country legally that we had during the founding of this country there would be no such thing as illegal immigration. There would be no point in trying to sneak into the country because virtually every single solitary person that could get here was allowed in.

Click to expand...

Yes, lets legalize people that already showed they have no respect for our laws. Brilliant.

Henrin said:

Yes, lets legalize people that already showed they have no respect for our laws. Brilliant.

Click to expand...

Everyone breaks the law when the law is ****ing idiotic. Shall we deport everyone in the country with a speeding ticket or a parking ticket too? Did we round up and arrest everyone who drank alcohol under prohibition before we repealed prohibition? No, the law was stupid so nobody was following it so we did the smart thing and got rid of it.

To be honest I think I'd almost rather deport legal immigrants. Anybody dumb enough to wait in a line for 10 years when you could easily just hop across the border is probably an idiot.

roughdraft274 said:

I pointed out why they are stupid. It wasn't a long post so I'm not quite sure how you managed to miss it. Like I said, asking someone for the exact number of how many illegals he thinks is ok in this country has nothing to do with "whats the right policy for the ones that are currently here" which is what the guy was arguing for. You should probably read what someone posts before commenting on it. Let me know if I can help you in any way to understand what I'm saying.

Click to expand...

Maybe you really have no idea or really can't see the relation... maybe Tucker's question's do go over your head. And your reason is... that Sanctuary city policies have nothing to do with questions about illegal immigration? They seem quite related lol. Especially since the people who support sanctuary cities also support illegal immigration... or at least support not enforcing immigration law.

"whats a good number of illegals?" is a question meant to force the dodging lying leftist to recognize that ideally you want zero illegal immigration. Making him admit that illegal immigration is against the law and should be addressed. Because many on the left simply do not want to enforce our laws... and asking that question forces him to recognize he does not want America to enforce it's own laws and that illegal immigrants actively and intentionally broke those laws. When we think of this frankly, The guest repeatedly is trying to argue that having people break these laws is beneficial. Which is a completely irrelevant argument... for example, who cares if murdering all black people will reduce crime rates? Murdering is wrong and against the law.

And I'm afraid you missed Tucker's point again in reference to the study. Just because cities that are "sanctuary" having higher wages on average does NOT mean that that is the causation of higher wages. There is no study proving "CAUSATION". In fact, cities that benefit for a lot of cheap labor probably do better as a whole... but better for the rich in those cities, not for the poor. When low skill labor supply is high, then that lowers wages... which in turn increases profits. Aside from all of that, cities like LA and New York have ridiculously high costs of living, 20$ in New york is NOT 20$ in Atlanta... so comparing wages flatly is dishonest. Also, as Tucker mentioned, many of those cities have had a well established economic history for reasons entirely other than them being sanctuary.

These aren't stupid question :doh

MrWonka said:

Everyone breaks the law when the law is ****ing idiotic. Shall we deport everyone in the country with a speeding ticket or a parking ticket too? Did we round up and arrest everyone who drank alcohol under prohibition before we repealed prohibition? No, the law was stupid so nobody was following it so we did the smart thing and got rid of it.

To be honest I think I'd almost rather deport legal immigrants. Anybody dumb enough to wait in a line for 10 years when you could easily just hop across the border is probably an idiot.

Click to expand...

immigration laws are idiotic? ... that's a new one. You call every country I know of in the world idiotic...which, you might not be wrong lol, but i'm not sure for those reasons xD

celticwar17 said:

immigration laws are idiotic? ... that's a new one.

Click to expand...

No, actually it isn't. In fact both parties have long agreed that we need to fix our immigration system because it's ****ing stupid. It shouldn't take 14 years for an obviously good person to come to America. George W. Bush tried to make this a center piece of his administration, but it was his own republican party that fought him on it. Romney, Jeb Bush, and Marco Rubio all wanted to make this a part of their campaigns as well because they recognized that it's a major problem. They couldn't get elected though because the truth is that the entire republican party is brimming with bigots. Basically the whole party from top to bottom is nothing but racists, xenophobes, homophobes, misogynists, and religious zealots.

Immigrants come here because we NEED them here. Even when America is sitting at full employment we have millions of jobs left over that our own people simply can't do or won't do. Immigrant labor is the only realistic way to fill the demand, and putting up a stupid wall to indiscriminately keep people out is the height of stupidity.

celticwar17 said:

Maybe you really have no idea or really can't see the relation... maybe Tucker's question's do go over your head.

Click to expand...

HAHAHA....believe me. Tucker Carlson has never asked a question that has gone over the head of a liberal. He is one of if not the dumbest people in cable news.

roughdraft274 said:

Tucker is such a ****ing moron, lol.

Good lord.

The questions that this guy avoids are stupid questions. Sanctuary city policies are either good or bad and hav nothing to do with bull**** questions like "whats a good number of illegals?" or "What do you think of what this lady said?"

Click to expand...

The man supports sanctuary cities and believes that illegal immigrants should be left alone and not deported, making Carlson's question "How many illegals in the country do you think is too many?" a legitimate one. The man offered no answer.

The head of the NY city council likened the Administration's handling of immigration enforcement to “ethnic cleansing” at a conference he attended, and Carlson simply asked the man if he agreed with her assessment. The fact he was asked the question several times and didn't answer speaks volumes. It says that either a) he put his political agenda ahead of morality, or b) he agrees with her... Either way, it makes him a leftist scumbag and the fact that you attack Carlson and say absolutely nothing about his refusal to denounce that crap, doesn't say much for you.

He asked stupid questions and the guy avoided them. When he was wrong or asked good questions they guy answered them or cited a study showing that Tucker is a ****ing moron.

Click to expand...

Carlson blasted him right out of the water on that study... He pointed out the fact that the study's conclusions have shown absolutely no causation between the number of illegals and worker wages in those areas. If you disagree, then please provide the proof.

Unless of course you only posted on this thread because you just wanted to vent your hatred and rage toward those who don't embrace your political views.


.

celticwar17 said:

Maybe you really have no idea or really can't see the relation... maybe Tucker's question's do go over your head. And your reason is... that Sanctuary city policies have nothing to do with questions about illegal immigration? They seem quite related lol.

Click to expand...

You are switching the topic from "this question has nothing to do with this policy" to "this question is related to this subject which is related to this policy". You aren't sticking to what I actually said and the actual point I made. Therefor I'm not reading anything past this first sentence. If you have a point showing that what I said is actually wrong or showing me that my opinion was because I wasn't thinking clearly, please start with that rather than trying to change the point I was making. As a reminder, my point was that you need not have an exact number of "how many illegals should we let in/is good for the country etc" in order to argue that "sanctuary city policies do have benefits under our current situation".

Three minutes into this interview and I would have just been, "Yes, Tucker, you are a racist and support ethnic cleansing." His questions to this guy expecting him to speak for other people were ridiculous to begin with.

Grim17 said:

The man supports sanctuary cities and believes that illegal immigrants should be left alone and not deported, making Carlson's question "How many illegals in the country do you think is too many?" a legitimate one. The man offered no answer.

The head of the NY city council likened the Administration's handling of immigration enforcement to “ethnic cleansing” at a conference he attended, and Carlson simply asked the man if he agreed with her assessment. The fact he was asked the question several times and didn't answer speaks volumes. It says that either a) he put his political agenda ahead of morality, or b) he agrees with her... Either way, it makes him a leftist scumbag and the fact that you attack Carlson and say absolutely nothing about his refusal to denounce that crap, doesn't say much for you.





Carlson blasted him right out of the water on that study... He pointed out the fact that the study's conclusions have shown absolutely no causation between the number of illegals and worker wages in those areas. If you disagree, then please provide the proof.

Unless of course you only posted on this thread because you just wanted to vent your hatred and rage toward those who don't embrace your political views.


.

Click to expand...

1. It's ironic that you of all people are complaining about other people's "rage" lol.

2. We get it. I disagree with you therefor I'm a terrible liberal scumbag even though I support many policies that would reduce illegal immigration and I haven't stated any actual support of sanctuary city policies, merely stated that it can be argued that they have benefits. If the benefits outweigh the negatives, I'm not sure.

3. Causation is nearly impossible to prove on cases like this but more importantly the guy never claimed it showed causation. But lets find a similar example. Lets say you did a study showing that cities with extremely strict gun control laws have higher violent crime rates or murders, would you accept "well you didn't prove causation" as a complete and utter destruction of your argument? I'm betting you wouldn't care so much about showing causation at this point, but would argue that the data, while it doesn't show causation, does in fact speak volumes. I will gladly admit that the study probably doesn't show causation (I haven't studied it) but if the rights argument is that sanctuary city policies result in spikes of violence and crime and rape and blood flowing in the streets, this study does in fact show that that claim isn't true and the opposite may in fact be true.

4. If the guy honestly believes that no illegal immigrants should be deported then I think he is very wrong. But if his argument is that sanctuary policies, where illegal immigrants can contact the police and report crimes without fear of being deported have a beneficial impact on the city and that's all he's saying, then I don't know anyone could find that laughable. You might not agree, but it's not outlandish at the very least.

The entire interview seemed to me like the guy wanted to stick on the topic of sanctuary city policies and tucker wanted to hop around from talking point to talking point until he could find something to hit the guy on. He seemed desperate which is typical Tucker Carlsen. He should put his bowtie back on. He sounds like a whiny little bitch. Constantly using that whiny sigh of his like a little kid. I mean, those faces that he makes, lol.

Henrin said:

Is there some sort of mental block in the head of progressives that stops them from grasping the difference between illegal immigrants and legal immigrants? Saying the US is a nation of immigrants when talking about illegal immigrants is retarded.

Click to expand...

It's wholly dishonest... They know it and they just don't give a damn... Remember, they're the "ends justify the means" crowd.

roughdraft274 said:

3. Causation is nearly impossible to prove on cases like this...

Click to expand...

Which is exactly what Carlson said, that the study he cited is meaningless and doesn't support his argument at all because it can't show causation.

Which begs the question, why did you say that citing that study was "showing that Tucker is a ****ing moron", when you just agreed with him?


.

backpacker said:

Three minutes into this interview and I would have just been, "Yes, Tucker, you are a racist and support ethnic cleansing." His questions to this guy expecting him to speak for other people were ridiculous to begin with.

Click to expand...

Carlson never asked him to speak for her, or anyone else.

He asked the man if he agreed with what she said.


.

celticwar17 said:

I would like for you to elaborate... You mention the questions are stupid... but you don't mention why? Does that make your reply stupid? because it is absent of any explanation of your opinion?.... all you're doing is calling people names.

Who is the stupid one I wonder :doh

Click to expand...

Stupid questions are rather like beauty or obscenity aren't they--in the eye of the beholder?

IMO most of the talking heads on TV ask stupid questions, but that's just me. At least 3 out of 4 are stupid enough to make me change the channel.

backpacker said:

Three minutes into this interview and I would have just been, "Yes, Tucker, you are a racist and support ethnic cleansing." His questions to this guy expecting him to speak for other people were ridiculous to begin with.

Click to expand...

:roll:

Wasn't he asked to appear on the show so he could speak for other people and represent their cause?

Should one assume you agree with the NYC council person who said immigration laws are like ethnic cleansing?

Grim17 said:

Which is exactly what Carlson said, that the study he cited is meaningless and doesn't support his argument at all because it can't show causation.

Which begs the question, why did you say that citing that study was "showing that Tucker is a ****ing moron", when you just agreed with him?


.

Click to expand...

Sorry. Address my entire post and not the cherry picked half sentence or you don't get a reply. Thx.

MrWonka said:

Everyone breaks the law when the law is ****ing idiotic. Shall we deport everyone in the country with a speeding ticket or a parking ticket too? Did we round up and arrest everyone who drank alcohol under prohibition before we repealed prohibition? No, the law was stupid so nobody was following it so we did the smart thing and got rid of it.

To be honest I think I'd almost rather deport legal immigrants. Anybody dumb enough to wait in a line for 10 years when you could easily just hop across the border is probably an idiot.

Click to expand...

But in this case the law is not idiotic.

The country has the right to know who is coming across the border and what they have to offer the country.

roughdraft274 said:

Sorry. Address my entire post and not the cherry picked half sentence or you don't get a reply. Thx.

Click to expand...

Your statement that the guest citing that study was "showing that Tucker is a ****ing moron" is directly contradicted by you admitting that "Causation is nearly impossible to prove"... which is EXACTLY what Carlson said.

It's clear your attack on him was based on nothing more than your partisanship and hatred for anyone who doesn't see things from your political perspective.


.

Grim17 said:

Your statement that the guest citing that study was "showing that Tucker is a ****ing moron" is directly contradicted by you admitting that "Causation is nearly impossible to prove"... which is EXACTLY what Carlson said.

It's clear your attack on him was based on nothing more than your partisanship and hatred for anyone who doesn't see things from your political perspective.


.

Click to expand...

Carlson: Theres no studies showing that sanctuary cities are safer, that's completely made up.
The guy: Heres a study showing that accross the country, cities with sanctuary policies have less violent crime etc etc.
Carlson: But you can't prove causation!

Carlson claimed there are no studies that show that sanctuary cities are safer. Guy presents a study that shows that the sanctuary cities that we have in the US are statistically safer and Carlson retreats to "but causation". Causation isn't a part of the debate Grim. If you say that households with firearms are safer and then show me a study that households with firearms statistically have less crimes committed in them, then I can't prove you wrong by saying "but causation!" You proved your point. They are statistically safer. The guy was right and Carlson was being a whiny bitch. That's why you refuse to address my actual points. Causation is you and your buddy Tucker stepping back after being slapped with facts and changing the argument.