Should the Statue of Liberty be taken down and put in a mueseum?

[Alabama_Indy10]

Only on atlas would this ever be a question. And only on atlas would this idea have any support.

[Koharu]

Nah. This is another riff on what we've done in secret for centuries. Thankfully, this time the public is aware of the horrors involved and can't stomach it. As this article says, it's not who we have to be.

Separating Families? It's What the US Always Does

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Nah. This is another riff on what we've done in secret for centuries. Thankfully, this time the public is aware of the horrors involved and can't stomach it. As this article says, it's not who we have to be.

Separating Families? It's What the US Always Does

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not signing off on this part of history, but everyone involved is long dead.  Ditto slavery.  I agree that some of the perpetrators of Jim Crow segregation are still alive.  What we are as a nation today is not what we were in 1850.  To imply we are is besmirching millions of law-abiding decent people who are in no way responsible for any of that.

But we are also a nation of laws, and our immigration laws are part of our body of law.  And they are not unreasonable; they seek to regulate who we take in and on what basis for the benefit of our citizenry (not the benefit of foreigners).  If that's unreasonable, show me which nations do their immigration laws on another basis.

I'm not unmindful of our national flaws, and the corollary of "My Country, Right or Wrong" is "when wrong, to be set right".  But our nation (well, it's my nation; you sure don't sound like it's yours when you post); the AMERICAN nation is not only a GREAT nation, but a GOOD nation, and the author of much good worldwide.  Whatever one's politics or policy viewpoints, that statement ought to be a point of agreement.  If you don't agree with that premise, then, as far as I'm concerned, I'll do anytihing I can to keep you and persons like you from attaining public office.

[7,052,770]

I'm not unmindful of our national flaws, and the corollary of "My Country, Right or Wrong" is "when wrong, to be set right".  But our nation (well, it's my nation; you sure don't sound like it's yours when you post); the AMERICAN nation is not only a GREAT nation, but a GOOD nation, and the author of much good worldwide.  Whatever one's politics or policy viewpoints, that statement ought to be a point of agreement.  If you don't agree with that premise, then, as far as I'm concerned, I'll do anytihing I can to keep you and persons like you from attaining public office.

Uh, you voted for the candidate in 2016 who literally campaigned on the idea that America is neither great nor good.

[Doimper]

I'm not unmindful of our national flaws, and the corollary of "My Country, Right or Wrong" is "when wrong, to be set right".  But our nation (well, it's my nation; you sure don't sound like it's yours when you post); the AMERICAN nation is not only a GREAT nation, but a GOOD nation, and the author of much good worldwide.  Whatever one's politics or policy viewpoints, that statement ought to be a point of agreement.  If you don't agree with that premise, then, as far as I'm concerned, I'll do anytihing I can to keep you and persons like you from attaining public office.

Uh, you voted for the candidate in 2016 who literally campaigned on the idea that America is neither great nor good.

It's no use; he has no self-awareness whatsoever. He'll probably post a text brick about how voting for a rapist is reconcilable with being a Good Christian™.

But we are also a nation of laws, and our immigration laws are part of our body of law. 

The Pharaoh was just enforcing law and order when he deported Noah and his illegal immigrants.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I'm not unmindful of our national flaws, and the corollary of "My Country, Right or Wrong" is "when wrong, to be set right".  But our nation (well, it's my nation; you sure don't sound like it's yours when you post); the AMERICAN nation is not only a GREAT nation, but a GOOD nation, and the author of much good worldwide.  Whatever one's politics or policy viewpoints, that statement ought to be a point of agreement.  If you don't agree with that premise, then, as far as I'm concerned, I'll do anytihing I can to keep you and persons like you from attaining public office.

Uh, you voted for the candidate in 2016 who literally campaigned on the idea that America is neither great nor good.

No, I didn't vote for Hillary Clinton.  Sorry.

I understand MAGA is a campaign theme, and not something I take any more seriously than that.  But I don't know where Donald Trump, while decrying what he decries, ever said that America was no longer a GOOD nation.  Indeed, he made a point that others have made; that our goodness and openness has routinely been manipulated by our enemies, and we didn't call them on it.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I'm not unmindful of our national flaws, and the corollary of "My Country, Right or Wrong" is "when wrong, to be set right".  But our nation (well, it's my nation; you sure don't sound like it's yours when you post); the AMERICAN nation is not only a GREAT nation, but a GOOD nation, and the author of much good worldwide.  Whatever one's politics or policy viewpoints, that statement ought to be a point of agreement.  If you don't agree with that premise, then, as far as I'm concerned, I'll do anytihing I can to keep you and persons like you from attaining public office.

Uh, you voted for the candidate in 2016 who literally campaigned on the idea that America is neither great nor good.

It's no use; he has no self-awareness whatsoever. He'll probably post a text brick about how voting for a rapist is reconcilable with being a Good Christian™.

But we are also a nation of laws, and our immigration laws are part of our body of law. 

The Pharaoh was just enforcing law and order when he deported Noah and his illegal immigrants.

Now I know you hate Christians.  But even the atheists here know it was Moses that confronted Pharoah demanding his people be freed (and bringing down plagues to make it happen).

This is dumber than Archie Bunker referring to "Richard E. Nixon" or bragging on America for havinb the "Grossest National Product".

[Doimper]

I'm not unmindful of our national flaws, and the corollary of "My Country, Right or Wrong" is "when wrong, to be set right".  But our nation (well, it's my nation; you sure don't sound like it's yours when you post); the AMERICAN nation is not only a GREAT nation, but a GOOD nation, and the author of much good worldwide.  Whatever one's politics or policy viewpoints, that statement ought to be a point of agreement.  If you don't agree with that premise, then, as far as I'm concerned, I'll do anytihing I can to keep you and persons like you from attaining public office.

Uh, you voted for the candidate in 2016 who literally campaigned on the idea that America is neither great nor good.

It's no use; he has no self-awareness whatsoever. He'll probably post a text brick about how voting for a rapist is reconcilable with being a Good Christian™.

But we are also a nation of laws, and our immigration laws are part of our body of law.

The Pharaoh was just enforcing law and order when he deported Noah and his illegal immigrants.

Now I know you hate Christians.

No, I just hate your politicized brand of racial resentment that happens to feature a thin veneer of smug Christianity over it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Do you think that Enrique Peña Nieto will bring a plague down on Mar-a-Lago until Trump stops caging children?

[7,052,770]

I'm not unmindful of our national flaws, and the corollary of "My Country, Right or Wrong" is "when wrong, to be set right".  But our nation (well, it's my nation; you sure don't sound like it's yours when you post); the AMERICAN nation is not only a GREAT nation, but a GOOD nation, and the author of much good worldwide.  Whatever one's politics or policy viewpoints, that statement ought to be a point of agreement.  If you don't agree with that premise, then, as far as I'm concerned, I'll do anytihing I can to keep you and persons like you from attaining public office.

Uh, you voted for the candidate in 2016 who literally campaigned on the idea that America is neither great nor good.

No, I didn't vote for Hillary Clinton.  Sorry.

I understand MAGA is a campaign theme, and not something I take any more seriously than that.  But I don't know where Donald Trump, while decrying what he decries, ever said that America was no longer a GOOD nation.  Indeed, he made a point that others have made; that our goodness and openness has routinely been manipulated by our enemies, and we didn't call them on it.

Oh, OK. "America's not great" was just a theme, so it doesn't count. Just handwave it away.

And it is extremely well-documented that Trump has deflected any criticism of cozying up to Putin, KJU, and other brutal dictators by pointing out that America is often not the good guy in history.

So as usual, you're full of sh**t.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I'm not unmindful of our national flaws, and the corollary of "My Country, Right or Wrong" is "when wrong, to be set right".  But our nation (well, it's my nation; you sure don't sound like it's yours when you post); the AMERICAN nation is not only a GREAT nation, but a GOOD nation, and the author of much good worldwide.  Whatever one's politics or policy viewpoints, that statement ought to be a point of agreement.  If you don't agree with that premise, then, as far as I'm concerned, I'll do anytihing I can to keep you and persons like you from attaining public office.

Uh, you voted for the candidate in 2016 who literally campaigned on the idea that America is neither great nor good.

It's no use; he has no self-awareness whatsoever. He'll probably post a text brick about how voting for a rapist is reconcilable with being a Good Christian™.

But we are also a nation of laws, and our immigration laws are part of our body of law.

The Pharaoh was just enforcing law and order when he deported Noah and his illegal immigrants.

Now I know you hate Christians.

No, I just hate your politicized brand of racial resentment that happens to feature a thin veneer of smug Christianity over it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Do you think that Enrique Peña Nieto will bring a plague down on Mar-a-Lago until Trump stops caging children?

I should have been more precise:  God responded to Moses and brought the plagues down. 

But to answer your question:  No.

[BundouYMB]

America has no moral right to display the statue of liberty while under fascist rule. It should be put in an underground vault until this sad chapter in our national history is over.

[Green Line]

Yes.  North Korea will send us a new present to display.  They are our friends now.  These are our people.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Only on atlas would this ever be a question. And only on atlas would this idea have any support.

[Famous Mortimer]

Just take down the dumb plaque that people think is a law for some reason.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

That America is a nation of immigrants is an integral part of our history. That this has always been resisted is likewise inescapable. That our status as an immigrant haven, just as our status as the world police, is not enshrined in law is correct. However, those that would seek to change these things run the risk of jeopardizing the American exceptionalism that our nationalism is allegedly based on. The Immigration Act of 1924 was in law for forty years, and this was a time where, for related and unrelated reasons, one of the greatest periods of nation building in this country’s history occurred.

[Progressive Pessimist]

No. We need to be able to use her like they did in Ghostbusters 2 and park her outside The White House as a way to demonstrate that if they don't uphold what she represents, she will squash them like an ant.

[Fuzzy Bear]

That America is a nation of immigrants is an integral part of our history. That this has always been resisted is likewise inescapable. That our status as an immigrant haven, just as our status as the world police, is not enshrined in law is correct. However, those that would seek to change these things run the risk of jeopardizing the American exceptionalism that our nationalism is allegedly based on. The Immigration Act of 1924 was in law for forty years, and this was a time where, for related and unrelated reasons, one of the greatest periods of nation building in this country’s history occurred.

[Badger]

That America is a nation of immigrants is an integral part of our history. That this has always been resisted is likewise inescapable. That our status as an immigrant haven, just as our status as the world police, is not enshrined in law is correct. However, those that would seek to change these things run the risk of jeopardizing the American exceptionalism that our nationalism is allegedly based on. The Immigration Act of 1924 was in law for forty years, and this was a time where, for related and unrelated reasons, one of the greatest periods of nation building in this country’s history occurred.

The post-civil war through World War I was also one of the greatest periods of American growth, in no small part due to immigrants. The 40 years after 1924 we're also a. Of growth in no small part due to the children of those immigrants whom we largely welcomed beforehand being assimilated and made part of the middle class. Tying any scrap of that growth two limiting immigration is historically inaccurate

[Famous Mortimer]

That America is a nation of immigrants is an integral part of our history. That this has always been resisted is likewise inescapable. That our status as an immigrant haven, just as our status as the world police, is not enshrined in law is correct. However, those that would seek to change these things run the risk of jeopardizing the American exceptionalism that our nationalism is allegedly based on. The Immigration Act of 1924 was in law for forty years, and this was a time where, for related and unrelated reasons, one of the greatest periods of nation building in this country’s history occurred.

The post-civil war through World War I was also one of the greatest periods of American growth, in no small part due to immigrants. The 40 years after 1924 we're also a. Of growth in no small part due to the children of those immigrants whom we largely welcomed beforehand being assimilated and made part of the middle class. Tying any scrap of that growth two limiting immigration is historically inaccurate

The post-Civil War through World War I era say tremendous economic growth but mostly only among the rich. It was the Gilded Age. An economic model which should not be copied.

The growth after 1924 was absolutely linked to the pause in immigration. The pause in immigration meant that wages weren't constantly being depressed and that unionization was possible. That is what allowed those children of immigrants to become middle class.

Compare to today when we have constant never ending immigration and almost no social mobility and unions at their least influential ever.

[OSR stands with Israel]

That America is a nation of immigrants is an integral part of our history. That this has always been resisted is likewise inescapable. That our status as an immigrant haven, just as our status as the world police, is not enshrined in law is correct. However, those that would seek to change these things run the risk of jeopardizing the American exceptionalism that our nationalism is allegedly based on. The Immigration Act of 1924 was in law for forty years, and this was a time where, for related and unrelated reasons, one of the greatest periods of nation building in this country’s history occurred.

The post-civil war through World War I was also one of the greatest periods of American growth, in no small part due to immigrants. The 40 years after 1924 we're also a. Of growth in no small part due to the children of those immigrants whom we largely welcomed beforehand being assimilated and made part of the middle class. Tying any scrap of that growth two limiting immigration is historically inaccurate

The post-Civil War through World War I era say tremendous economic growth but mostly only among the rich. It was the Gilded Age. An economic model which should not be copied.

The growth after 1924 was absolutely linked to the pause in immigration. The pause in immigration meant that wages weren't constantly being depressed and that unionization was possible. That is what allowed those children of immigrants to become middle class.

Compare to today when we have constant never ending immigration and almost no social mobility and unions at their least influential ever.

1980-Present America>>>> 1932-1968 America even when it comes to the Economy

[Kodak]

That America is a nation of immigrants is an integral part of our history. That this has always been resisted is likewise inescapable. That our status as an immigrant haven, just as our status as the world police, is not enshrined in law is correct. However, those that would seek to change these things run the risk of jeopardizing the American exceptionalism that our nationalism is allegedly based on. The Immigration Act of 1924 was in law for forty years, and this was a time where, for related and unrelated reasons, one of the greatest periods of nation building in this country’s history occurred.

The post-civil war through World War I was also one of the greatest periods of American growth, in no small part due to immigrants. The 40 years after 1924 we're also a. Of growth in no small part due to the children of those immigrants whom we largely welcomed beforehand being assimilated and made part of the middle class. Tying any scrap of that growth two limiting immigration is historically inaccurate

The post-Civil War through World War I era say tremendous economic growth but mostly only among the rich. It was the Gilded Age. An economic model which should not be copied.

The growth after 1924 was absolutely linked to the pause in immigration. The pause in immigration meant that wages weren't constantly being depressed and that unionization was possible. That is what allowed those children of immigrants to become middle class.

Compare to today when we have constant never ending immigration and almost no social mobility and unions at their least influential ever.

Correlation does not equal causation.



More specific to your point, union organization had almost nothing to do with immigration. Unions reached their strongest power during the great depression, a period where wages were as depressed as possible from the unemployment rate, because the federal government decided to support them, and their power waned because the federal government started opposing them again.

[Famous Mortimer]

That America is a nation of immigrants is an integral part of our history. That this has always been resisted is likewise inescapable. That our status as an immigrant haven, just as our status as the world police, is not enshrined in law is correct. However, those that would seek to change these things run the risk of jeopardizing the American exceptionalism that our nationalism is allegedly based on. The Immigration Act of 1924 was in law for forty years, and this was a time where, for related and unrelated reasons, one of the greatest periods of nation building in this country’s history occurred.

The post-civil war through World War I was also one of the greatest periods of American growth, in no small part due to immigrants. The 40 years after 1924 we're also a. Of growth in no small part due to the children of those immigrants whom we largely welcomed beforehand being assimilated and made part of the middle class. Tying any scrap of that growth two limiting immigration is historically inaccurate

The post-Civil War through World War I era say tremendous economic growth but mostly only among the rich. It was the Gilded Age. An economic model which should not be copied.

The growth after 1924 was absolutely linked to the pause in immigration. The pause in immigration meant that wages weren't constantly being depressed and that unionization was possible. That is what allowed those children of immigrants to become middle class.

Compare to today when we have constant never ending immigration and almost no social mobility and unions at their least influential ever.

Correlation does not equal causation.



More specific to your point, union organization had almost nothing to do with immigration. Unions reached their strongest power during the great depression, a period where wages were as depressed as possible from the unemployment rate, because the federal government decided to support them, and their power waned because the federal government started opposing them again.

Correlation doesn't NECESSARILY mean causation. That doesn't mean it rules out causation.

Causation is extremely likely in this case.

Although people who want to believe immigration is the solution to all problems will chose not to see it.

[OSR stands with Israel]

That America is a nation of immigrants is an integral part of our history. That this has always been resisted is likewise inescapable. That our status as an immigrant haven, just as our status as the world police, is not enshrined in law is correct. However, those that would seek to change these things run the risk of jeopardizing the American exceptionalism that our nationalism is allegedly based on. The Immigration Act of 1924 was in law for forty years, and this was a time where, for related and unrelated reasons, one of the greatest periods of nation building in this country’s history occurred.

The post-civil war through World War I was also one of the greatest periods of American growth, in no small part due to immigrants. The 40 years after 1924 we're also a. Of growth in no small part due to the children of those immigrants whom we largely welcomed beforehand being assimilated and made part of the middle class. Tying any scrap of that growth two limiting immigration is historically inaccurate

The post-Civil War through World War I era say tremendous economic growth but mostly only among the rich. It was the Gilded Age. An economic model which should not be copied.

The growth after 1924 was absolutely linked to the pause in immigration. The pause in immigration meant that wages weren't constantly being depressed and that unionization was possible. That is what allowed those children of immigrants to become middle class.

Compare to today when we have constant never ending immigration and almost no social mobility and unions at their least influential ever.

Correlation does not equal causation.



More specific to your point, union organization had almost nothing to do with immigration. Unions reached their strongest power during the great depression, a period where wages were as depressed as possible from the unemployment rate, because the federal government decided to support them, and their power waned because the federal government started opposing them again.

Correlation doesn't NECESSARILY mean causation. That doesn't mean it rules out causation.

Causation is extremely likely in this case.

Although people who want to believe immigration is the solution to all problems will chose not to see it.

Again supporting Immigration DOES NOT EQUAL supporting open borders.

[Sir Mohamed]

We should fix our immigration system instead. That makes a lot more sense.

[Maxwell]

The bestest compromise:

all historical statues of all historical figures should be replaced by a statue of Braxton Bragg on the toilet taking a poop.