Posts by Morgan Cook10

Alex Miller3 said:"We"? You think I'm Angela Merkel or Martina Pusić or something? Seriously?😁

I'm only pulling you into this conversation because you were the one who admitted you don't see a way out. It’s not about putting anything on your shoulders—it's just that you're the one saying there's no solution to be found.😁

In that sense, you, Martina Pusić, and Merkel are all cut from the same cloth... because none of you have a clue what's actually going on. Honestly, I could throw Zoran Milanović, Miro Cerar, Aleksandar Vučić, and the rest of that boys' club into the mix too—just so you don't go thinking this is some kind of "women's issue."

I see a solution, but honestly, it would probably look pretty ugly to most people. It wouldn't exactly fly with the humanists or that trendy, urban crowd, either. It basically boils down to those old-school methods my late grandma used to swear by... especially that one about how "the needle came straight from heaven."

Alex Miller3 said:Look, I didn't say that's how it *has* to be... I just meant they’ll probably try to pull something like that if all the other borders to our West and North get shut down.
I don't have the answers here. Honestly? I'm scared nobody does...

There's no solution because you guys respond to the blatant disrespect and criminal behavior of asylum seekers with nothing more than a shrug, just like what you see in this link.
http://edition.cnn.com/world/news/example-link-here

If I tried setting fire to some trailer park, I'd be looking at ten years in federal prison for arson before anyone even mentioned "restraint."

The fact that you and our government can't find an answer isn't proof that there isn't one—it's just a reflection of how incompetent you both are at handling this crisis.

Alex Miller3 said:And honestly, we’ll probably stop taking them too... if it's even possible given how things are with the border near Canada.
Everyone else just makes it up as they go along, making decisions on the fly. But when our people try the same thing? Suddenly everyone's mad at us. It all depends on how everyone else acts around you. I mean, isn't that just a losing hand?
Let's just tell Germany to go ahead and help out then... yeah, right.

I'm not quite seeing how you plan to pull off this "stopping the intake" thing.🤔

Merkelica is losing her mind.
Seriously, do we actually want to invite a quasi-dictatorship into the European Union? We’re talking about a place where basic human rights are systematically trampled upon and a bomb goes off every other day.

I’m honestly starting to get why the Germans lost both World Wars... It’s a total mystery how such a talented nation can have absolutely zero sense of strategy.

Sam Alvarez4 said:The way this poll is set up feels way too restrictive.

Does this apply to all immigrants, or just a specific group?
Are we talking about economic migrants and refugees, or strictly one or the other?

I have plenty more questions 😬, but we could be here forever...

Given the topic, it’s definitely aimed at the current wave of people crossing the border illegally.

If that isn't obvious, I don't think any amount of extra clarification is going to help him see reason.

Joseph Wright4 said:But nobody is actually disputing your point. We just aren't talking about the same thing. You have subgroups, too—like Italian communities or whatever within the white population, or among Black people, Asians, etc.
The point is they all basically operate under one general system. They can all respect a single set of values and laws. It's kind of like how you noticed there isn't really multiculturalism elsewhere, except maybe in the Maghreb... even if Argentinians and Japanese are worlds apart in some ways.

Look, if crime rates in a certain Black neighborhood in Detroit are ten times higher than in a white neighborhood... I’d argue those two groups aren't operating under the same system or sharing the same values and laws.

For example... if a Black officer kills a white bank robber, most of white Detroit will just say, "Well, an officer killed a robber." But if a white officer kills a Black bank robber? Half the city might burn down.

That’s a pretty massive cultural distinction right there.

Anyway, that's a bit of a tangent. That map was really meant to show how people in American cities tend to stick to their own circles to a surprising degree. Personally, I always assumed the melting pot was much more intense than that.

Joseph Wright4 said:But nobody is actually disputing your point. We just aren't talking about the same thing. You have subgroups, too—like Italian communities or whatever within the white population, or among Black people, Asians, etc.
The point is they all basically operate under one general system. They can all respect a single set of values and laws. It's kind of like how you noticed there isn't really multiculturalism elsewhere, except maybe in the Maghreb... even if Argentinians and Japanese are worlds apart in some ways.

In that case, we’re seeing exactly what you mentioned, and you can't really call that multiculturalism... unless you count Maghrebis.

Side note: I'm grouping the Japanese in with the other three for a simple reason. Even though their culture feels different, the end result of their way of life is the same as the other three groups: order, hard work, and prosperity.

Raymond Peterson81 said:Multiculturalism is such a heated topic lately—honestly, anyone who considers themselves civilized (and isn't just picking their nose) and isn't a hardcore American nationalist tends to back the idea of multiculturalism (s). Forgive me if I sound full of typical prejudices, but it seems to me that the push for multiculturalism mostly comes from leftists, liberals, and that crowd. It’s hard to find a conservative who actually advocates for it, though I suppose there might be one or two here and there. So... can someone actually explain to me what a multicultural society is supposed to mean?

I’ll throw out a simple, abstract example here—don't take it too literally unless you're looking to troll the thread or turn this into some ridiculous joke that would make the whole discussion pointless.

Let’s imagine a little multicultural village consisting of five houses.

House 1 — a couple from Scandinavia
House 2 — a couple from Maghreb House 3
House 3 — a couple from Argentina House 4
House 4 — a couple from Australia House 5
House 5 — a couple from Japan

So, what exactly is the goal of a multicultural society? Is the idea to keep each house exactly as it was originally, preserving the specific customs those couples hold dear while working to bridge differences through tolerance... or is the goal to just blend everyone together, erasing those "outdated concepts" of nations and geographic identities because, hey, we're all living on the same planet anyway?

If the people from these five houses all mix together, then it isn't a multicultural society anymore. How can it be called multicultural if everything gets blended? After a few generations, you'll just have a massive mix of everything—it doesn't matter what you call it, but it won't be "multi," it'll just be "uni."

By the way, your example doesn't really work.
If you just take out house number two, you don't even have a multicultural society to begin with.🤔

Raymond Peterson81 said:Reading Joseph Wright4's description, I got the impression that his take on multiculturalism involves a certain kind of relativism—though he frames it under the banner of accepting diversity. To me, though, this just feels like yet another instance of left-wing cognitive dissonance. It makes no sense to advocate for tolerance while simultaneously conditioning that tolerance on a "whatever happens, happens" attitude.

What kind of tolerance is this, really? What exactly is being promoted here—just letting things run wild if I understood him correctly? It sounds like selective moralizing being rebranded as cosmopolitanism, broad-mindedness, or pluralism—all tucked away behind long-winded sentences and demagoguery. Essentially, the rules aren't applied equally to everyone. For some groups, traditions are just mundane things that can change on a whim, but for others, those same customs are treated as sacred obligations that we must respect if we have any shred of decency or culture left in us.

That isn't rational.

Let’s drift back to that hypothetical village scenario for a moment. Australia House 5, the Japanese people. In rural Japan, there's a custom where doors aren't locked because merchants leave fish for their neighbors in the morning; if they find a door locked (since they wouldn't want to leave the fish out on the porch), they interpret it as a message saying, "you aren't welcome," which they view as an insult.

Do they have the right to demand that all doors be kept unlocked in the name of multiculturalism, simply because they feel oppressed or discriminated against otherwise?

I suspect the Japanese crowd will realize pretty quickly that in a multicultural neighborhood, there's always going to be a house... I won't name names for the sake of being politically correct... where the local custom is to rob anyone who leaves their door wide open. So, the answer to whether they *can* demand it is yes, but they'll probably start locking up their own doors very soon.

Joseph Wright4 said:The USA is its own weird case because the whole nation was built by people moving in from everywhere.

Even if you buy into this idea that "everyone stays in their own lane"—which isn't even really true—the point is the law applies to everyone equally. No Muslim, no Catholic, no one else can just go around pushing an agenda that breaks the legal framework.
The USA has what we’d consider extremely liberal laws regarding personal freedoms, but still—nobody gets to ignore the law just because of who they are.

http://www.wired.com/wp-content/uplo...troitlabel.jpg
This is what Detroit looks like visually... blue whites, green blacks, red and yellow.

Here’s the map for the other cities too.
http://www.wired.com/2013/08/how-seg...map-shows-you/

You can see the general rule here... dots stay with dots, lines stay with lines.

quietdriver said:I’m curious—how do you all think newcomers should actually carry themselves? Should they just dive headfirst into the local customs and ways of the country they’ve landed in, or is it better to hold onto their own culture and expect the locals to embrace that diversity?

It really depends on where you're heading.
If you move to somewhere like Germany, for example, you obviously need to respect the traditions of the people providing you with a livelihood. You can keep your own heritage alive within your family, provided you aren't being disrespectful to your hosts.
But if you're just moving from one city to another within the States... there's no real reason to change who you are, because those customs are basically the national standard anyway. If someone has an issue with that... they're free to move out of the US.

The third scenario is when you move to a place that doesn't strictly "belong" to any one group—take places like Australia or the USA, or any sort of multinational melting pot. In those cases, you should definitely hang onto your roots, because in a country where everyone is a guest, everyone is also a host.

vividotter7 said:I was reading that early signs can be chest pain, shoulder or back aches, and even stomach issues...

Look, honestly, you seem a bit young to be dealing with lung cancer. That said, there's really no harm in heading to the doctor just to get checked out and have some peace of mind.🤷

On another note, my dad passed away from lung cancer, and for him, the very first symptom was just a headache.

vividotter7 said:When I first felt this, I honestly panicked and quit smoking on the spot. I kept telling myself I was just overthinking it, but then how do you explain these random chest pains? Is it possible my body is just reacting badly to nicotine, or is it something else entirely?

Look, don't take my word as gospel since I'm definitely not a doctor... but in my experience, chest pain usually isn't lung issues—those tend to feel more like they're hitting you "in the back."☕div>

Raymond Rodriguez62 said:That’s exactly the point. Do you think the referendum results will be realistic—actually reflect what the people truly voted for?😕I’m worried the public won't even get a fair shake. I'm convinced Americans are against this and will stay opposed to the European Union.

The results of a referendum are always "real"... at least when it comes to these kinds of questions. Sure, the public can be totally swayed by media spin... but who can really blame them?🤷

Raymond Rodriguez62 said:It’s pretty funny how they claimed they were up by 40% before pivoting to say "as many as" 40% of Americans are against the European Union.😁 John Doe, as if they could ever be convincing—"AS MANY AS"!!! Isn't it more likely closer to 80%?😁

The Prime Minister already touched on this over at Apple! He basically explained that these Gallup polls are always rigged with leading questions just to get the specific result they want... so there's really no need to lose sleep over it. Like I said before, when the referendum actually happens, the people will make their own voices heard. Whatever the public decides, I'm down with it.🤷

Now we just have to sit through the inevitable wave of pro-EU propaganda, funded half by the government and half by the European Union.

Raymond Rodriguez62 said:Do you think today's segment on NBC was spreading outright misinformation? According to that Hendel poll, only 40% of Americans are actually against the European Union. Isn't this just a blatant attempt at manipulating public opinion?

Obviously.😁

But there's no need to lose sleep over it; they’ll eventually have to hold a referendum, which will finally show what everyone actually thinks. The big question, though, is whether they'll ever actually pull the trigger on that.

bluemarlin232 said:Spot on observation... personally, I don't think we'll EVER see all Americans standing together in a conflict again.
Actually, when the next fight breaks out, Americans are gonna turn on each other before they even look outward.

And honestly? That’s exactly what needs to happen.

And something tells me that showdown is going to be pretty bloody.😁

Justin Patel8 said:I honestly don't get people who travel to another country just to vent about their own—I mean, fine, go to some Western powerhouse if you need an audience, but heading straight to Mexico to complain? It’s just weird.

They’re doing it on purpose just to get a reaction... if they went to Germany, nobody would even blink!🤣🤣

In the end, everyone crawls back once they realize they haven't actually achieved anything.

Larry Williams5 said:They’re angry enough to try and snatch $15 billion—that’s roughly $2,000 per worker every single year—straight out of our collective pockets by hiking up their own benefits, all on top of what they already pull from payroll taxes. We didn't even pay that much in taxes back when we were dealing with the Venetians.
The Canadians are actually looking into giving voting rights to children just so the elderly demographic doesn't sell off their future.
Meanwhile, the Canadians are considering banning retiree-led political parties altogether, since their entire platform boils down to one thing: "How fast can we grab more cash for ourselves?"

Take that number up there... double it... and don't forget the $80 billion in imaginary debt they basically treated like a personal piggy bank. And all of this is thanks to the "golden generation"... the ones who spent the entire era of communism coasting along and then sprinted straight into early retirement the second they actually had to clock in for real.

shadowbison15 said:Forget about it—they don't have the stamina to keep up. But once they dig in their heels, every single one of them becomes an immovable object. If you add the fury of a tiny Social Security check to the mix, you’ve got the most relentless fighters for any "national cause" you can imagine.😁

Laugh all you want... but those retirees are eventually going to be the ones to sink us all.☕

I feel like this reporter is blurring the lines between America and Canada... because things definitely aren't hitting a boiling point here in the States, despite how much the recent protest chaos makes it look like they are. But if we're being honest, everyone is just looking for a convenient scapegoat to blame for the war over there.