“THEY” ARE NOT ON OUR SIDE — PART 3

Here we continue a series of seemingly disconnected posts.

What is this post about? Cheap labor. As we noted in Part 1, slavery is still a problem. We still look for ways to exploit each other.

Have you ever wondered what globalism about? Some people think it is a big conspiracy, and I suppose that is possible, but people don’t have to “conspire” to work in concert to achieve shared objectives.

Let’s consider a couple of examples of globalist policies: support for illegal immigration and our “free” trade policy.

Illegal Immigration

Illegal immigration is easy. Who doesn’t know about the trouble President Donald Trump has had stopping illegal immigration?

  • We have millions of illegal aliens in our country. The Supeme Court won’t even let the Census Bureau count how many of these people we have in the country. Furthermore, the courts insist we admit the children of people who are in our country illegally into our public schools and pay the cost of their education, including teaching them English.
  • Congress has made our immigration laws almost unworkable and will not fix those laws. So, the Trump administration has had to pressure Mexico to protect our southern border by threatening Mexico with tarriffs.
  • Congress will not implement a merit-based immigration system. Congress’ idea of “reform” is making the problem worse. For all practical purposes Congress wants open borders.
  • Congress will not fund the wall. So, Trump has had to connive to divert funds from other sources.
  • States and localities across the country have made themselves into “sanctuaries” for illegal aliens, including criminal illegal aliens. Therefore, illegal aliens who supposedly come here to escape crime bring that crime with them. Since some of these criminals attend our schools and put our children at risk, this is absurdly inexcusable.

Why the deceit and foot-dragging in Congress and throughout our political establishment? The immediate motive is cheap labor. Lots of American businessmen want cheap labor. The lower a business’ labor costs the greater the profits. This is why the European Union has let all those people into their country from the Middle East and Africa. Even though many of these people have no intention of assimilating and adopting the ways of their host nations, they work cheap, and the rich don’t have to rub elbows with them.

The rich also don’t pay the cost of educating illegal alien children and for all the other government handouts. Look at our own tax code. Ordinary taxpayers pay for all the nonsense. Lawmakers don’t tax the stuffing out of genuinely wealthy. They write loopholes for them and soak upper income earners with taxes, and our news programs don’t say much about this. Why? Well, who do you think owns the news networks?

Observe that there is no grand conspiracy. America’s elites, the people who own the means of production, just share common objectives, cheap labor and low taxes for themselves, not the rest of us.

Here are some references. Of course, the authors have a bias.

Trade Policies

What about our trade policies? Our trade policy with China stands out as the most absurd example. Instead of worrying about what is good for America, our leaders worry about making China happy for the sake of cheap labor. We even have reasons to worry about outright corruption. Consider how the August 2, 2019 episode of the Mark Levin Show began. Here is a link and a description.

Mark Levin Audio Rewind – 8/2/19
Description
On Friday’s Mark Levin show, President Trump has put China on notice yet again as he considers new tariffs on them. While it’s seldom discussed, China is a major threat to our national security. But for the Clinton Administration relaxing export controls for satellite technology, we’d still have oversight over this technology which they now use to guide their ballistic missiles. The Chinese government through corporations that they control have influenced many families in our political system; the Clinton’s, the McConnell’s, the Biden’s, and Sen. Feinstein’s family.

Criticizing our trade policy with China is also easy. We have a huge trade imbalance because the policy reeks of stupidity.

  • China poses a huge military threat to us and its neighbors. Contrary to the promises we were given, trade has not made China less dangerous. Instead, China has gained the expertise and resources it needs to build dangerous military weapons, and they have begun building and deploying such weapons.
  • China does not respect our patents. So our companies pay for development costs, and Chinese businesses reap the profits.
  • China does not have a capitalist economy. Its government is perfectly happy to bully our companies in order to get what it wants from them.
  • China manipulates its currency. This currency manipulation makes it easier for China to sell to us, and more difficult for us to sell to them.
  • We have borrowed a huge amount of money from China. Many believe this gives them leverage over us. This is money OUR GOVERNMENT is borrowing from China. Why would our leaders put us in such a bind with an obviously hostile and dangerous foreign power?

Here are some references related to our trade policy with China. These authors have a bias too.

So What Is The Point?

Neither our immigration policies nor our trade policies make much sense. What they do is explain the success of President Donald Trump’s campaign pledge to put America first. That pledge is one of the major reasons people voted for him. Unfortunately, BECAUSE Trump opposes illegal immigration and insists upon implementing trade policies with China that are fair to America, our elites are thoroughly enraged. These folks have demonstrated amazing greed. They want cheap labor, and they don’t seem to care about the cost to our country.

Amazing greed? Well, perhaps not. Think about the American Civil War. Think about the price the South paid for slavery. Southerners, not just the slave masters, absolutely refused to see the evils of slavery, and they almost tore our country apart. Many of our elites seem to have the same problem, and they have used their control of our schools and the mass media to propagandized the rest of us. Much of America has believed their nonsense. Thus, they have split our nation, and we have allowed them to do it.

What’s next? Well, there will be another post in this series. In that post we will consider the moral issues that have led to this mess.

 

226 thoughts on ““THEY” ARE NOT ON OUR SIDE — PART 3

Add yours

  1. Tom, tsalmon

    Tom’s comment, “That’s a good quote, but we still have to distinguish between essentials nonessentials. We also have to understand what is meant by unity.”

    Seems to jell perfect unity with my post today.

    Glad I read your comment Tom, because I added your thought of unity in the post as my last question for readers to decide.

    If Interested

    https://rudymartinka.com/2019/08/24/king-solomon-wisdom-of-fear-post-five/

    Regards and goodwill blogging.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. @tsalmon

        There is a difference between fear mongering and problem solving. If someone calls you a racist every time you try to discuss keeping terrorists out of our country or a merit based immigration system, who is fearmongering?

        Like

          1. @tsalmon

            If you don’t want to talk about fearmongering, then don’t, but don’t pretend the fearmongers have not worn out the term “racist”. So now they have use “white nationalist” and “white supremacist”. It just isn’t scary anymore. Instead, it is pathetic.

            Like

          2. Perhaps fear mongering so subtlety pricks the ego that those being mongered don’t see it, and don’t see when their fear turns to anger, resentment and retaliation. Like children we tend to rationalize our own fears and resentments as necessary and moral. Offense provokes offense until it’s all just pride and outrage.

            Perhaps that’s why fear mongering is always so much easier to see when when we see it in someone else or in the rear view mirror. Nothing excites our pride like fear and anger. Nothing makes us close our minds more swiftly than being called out on it. Real untruth hurts far less than the thing we won’t admit, even to ourselves, is at least a little bit true.

            Don’t you think that it was exactly this kind of narcissism that MLK faced every day? But he still kept putting the mirror to the faces of own Christian Faith, our own highest American ideals. Unfortunately, it is only after we literally crucify the source of our fears that we finally see ourselves for the frightened, hate filled children that we have been. God forgive us, for we do not know what we do, but we do it over and over again.

            After my wife and I drink coffee at our favorite coffee shop, we walk the dog down a lovely old street to the beach and back. Right before the road ends at the beach sits a few shabby duplexes. Today under an awning tent, several Hispanic women were cooking up something that smelled wonderful. I asked what it was. The children, translating, said it was Honduran pupusas and they asked if I’d like to try some. I did and then tried to tell them in my awful Spanish how good the food was. A beautiful little girl pet my dog while I ate. I bought several more for dinner. I just finished eating another pupusa as I wrote this.

            Funny, those ladies didn’t feel like criminals and invaders. I find myself wishing that I could ask them where they’d been and what they’d seen, what they’d suffered to get here.

            Like

          3. @tsalmon

            Democrats are subtle fearmongers? 😏😕😒

            You assume those ladies were in the country illegally. Wonder why? If they are here illegally, their first act in entering our country is to break the law. Great start!

            How could those ladies get into our country and stay here illegally? Why were you able to reach what appears to be an obvious conclusion? That is because our politicians have violated their oathes.

            We depend upon the law to maintain order and to help us deal with our fears of EACH OTHER. You don’t want fearmongering? Then oppose politicians who twisti the law into a pretzel just to get their own way.

            There is a difference between virtue signaling and being virtuous. I don’t claim to know for certain when someone is doing which. I am only a Conservative Republican. So I go with what people say. Fortunately, Democrats are not subtle.

            Anyway, I hope you did not get food poisoning.

            Like

          4. “Democrats are subtle fearmongers? 😏😕😒”

            ALL appeals to our fears are subtle. The key to face your fears.

            “You assume those ladies were in the country illegally. Wonder why?”

            No. I only assume they are made in the image of God however they got here.

            “How could those ladies get into our country and stay here illegally? Why were you able to reach what appears to be an obvious conclusion?”

            Why do you ask these questions? Who is it that you want to blame? What have you suffered that you feel the need to make someone else suffer?

            “We depend upon the law to maintain order and to help us deal with our fears of EACH OTHER. You don’t want fearmongering? Then oppose politicians who twisti the law into a pretzel just to get their own way.”

            Ha! You now worship the law? I’ll quote Liz in the most profound thing I’ve read on this blog: “Sometimes the law is an ass.”

            “There is a difference between virtue signaling and being virtuous. I don’t claim to know for certain when someone is doing which. I am only a Conservative Republican. So I go with what people say. Fortunately, Democrats are not subtle.”

            If you do a little reading about the psychological phenomenon (yes, shrinks came up with your new fav epithet), you’ll find that we all “virtue signal” Tom, meaning we all care about whether we are considered trustworthy (else why have a blog?). Social cohesion requires it, even in apes. As you say, some of us are actually more trustworthy than others and some are only signaling trustworthiness. I certainly may be mistaken (I often am), but is this about something II wrote here or what I have done to you that you think that I am lying? This is important because the virtues that I believe in are the same as those you profess to: love God and try to love you neighbor as God loves you. I no doubt am inferior to you in this regard. However, if you think Republicans, as some sort of new species of humans, are superior in virtue to those who call themselves Democrats, then for your sake I pray that you will someday be disabused of that strange pride.

            “Anyway, I hope you did not get food poisoning.”

            Now who is making uncharitable assumptions? I survived my gluttony. They were as delicious as the people who made them are beautiful. Thank you for your (virtue signaling?) concern. 😏

            Like

          5. @tsalmon

            Fearmongering works only if people respond the pressure. The Nazis succeeded in their persecution of the Jews when ambitious Germans “signalled” their approval and very few Germans voiced their disapproval.

            What do we have here? Liberal Democrats condemn anyone who wants to control immigration as racist, and adherents to an open borders policy signal their virtue — their greater approval of dark skinned foreigners — by ripping into anyone who dares to protect traditional American values as some kind of white nationalist.

            Instead of trying to signal your virtue, how thoroughly loving you are, is it at all possible you could discuss a political issue based upon the merits, or have you been rendered so fearful you have forgotten how that might be done?

            Like

          6. How many seconds does it take to go from zero to Nazi?

            “Instead of trying to signal your virtue, how thoroughly loving you are, is it at all possible you could discuss a political issue based upon the merits, or have you been rendered so fearful you have forgotten how that might be done?”

            Is that how I am a bad person? 😊

            Ok, I can learn from that. Help me then. Tell me what it would look like if I actually were a good person who was sincerely trying to find the most loving and unifying solutions rather than just making us fight and hate each other? Would I look like you?🙃

            Like

          7. @tsalmon

            There are no good people. Not one. Read Romans 3.

            When we think we are good, we forget we cannot save ourselves. We then point the finger at others.

            You take offense at what I said, but I did not make you the subject. You did. If you want to discuss the merits of an issue, then discuss the issue, not you or me. Stop making the immigration about how much you love and I supposedly fear immigrants. If implying someone is a racist is not akin to calling them a Nazi, it is only because Democrats have worn out the term.

            Am I a bigot? No human being has pure motives. Not one. Like every Christian, I am a work in progress. My hope is in the Lord.

            So stick to the issue. If you can find proof of racism, then mention it. Loving America and what it imperfectly stands for, however, is not bigotry. What is wrong is that so many have been taught to hate our country.

            Like

          8. “You take offense at what I said, but I did not make you the subject. You did. If you want to discuss the merits of an issue, then discuss the issue, not you or me. Stop making the immigration about how much you love and I supposedly fear immigrants. If implying someone is a racist is not akin to calling them a Nazi, it is only because Democrats have worn out the term.“

            You accused me of “virtue signaling”. I could only assume that you meant it in a bad way. If you didn’t that’s fine, but then why mention it like I was doing something wrong. But even if you did mean it in a bad way, I didn’t take offense. I just asked you to explain how my motives were wrong so that I could learn to make them right.

            You see brother, you want to have it both ways. I don’t. You want to question everyone else’s motives, but you don’t want yours or your partisan tribe’s motives questioned. No it’s not about you or me, it’s about being human. It’s about the motives behind all the people.

            Sin is all about motive and as you say, none of us are pure, but that does not mean the purity of intention is equal either. You know that. Some people’s motives for a given policy are far less pure than others. And ultimately, few people are able to delve very far inside their hearts to really see their motives as selfish, especially when they are the most cruelly selfish. Do you really think prewar Germans all thought themselves and their motives evil, but they were none the less, weren’t they? Are they responsible for motives that they should have more deeply examined for purity or selfishness?

            If we can’t criticize each other’s motives civilly, and more importantly, question our own, then how do we find the policy that is least sinful? I’m quite willing to have my motives questioned, and learn from the critique if they really can be shown to be sinful. The virtue that I’m signaling, that is behind my words here is the teachings of compassion and love of Jesus. How is that wrong? What can I learn if I’m wrong?

            What are your motives for supporting the absolute and cruel exclusion of your brothers and sisters and their innocent children fleeing in terrible desperation? How are those motives right? If you say that we are responsible to our own tribe first, then does that excuse any cruelty even for the smallest cost to us? If not, then at what point of cruelty and causing the suffering of even innocent children do we stop?

            You admit to bias, just like the rest of us. Could that bias be at all because of their color, their religion, their language, their poverty, their ignorance, their cultural differences from us? Be honest with yourself at least. Trump is pretty blunt about his xenophobia, but at least his selfish motives are transparent to everyone else, even if he claims they are virtuous.

            You accuse the Democrats of the cynicism of not really caring about brown people and just wanting their votes. This is nonsense as most immigrants, especially from South of the border, are natural religious conservatives. Regardless, how much more cynical is it to make them suffer and exclude them just to keep power? What if Republicans gain the world and they lose their souls?

            Like

          9. @tsalmon

            Listen to you. Without any reservation you question Trump’s motives, and that crap is based upon lies. I voted for Trump, but I am your brother. So I confuse you. Still, there is the news narrative. So I must be a bigot too. Hence, I just don’t know how to love people of color. What crap!

            You cannot fix my heart. That is above your pay grade. All you can do set an example and try to add to my knowledge.

            You also cannot add to my understanding. We can acquire knowledge from each other, but a new understanding requires us to reexamine our assumptions. That is a willful act that requires an active effort.

            So here is some knowledge. A decent immigration policy has nothing whatsoever to do with race. It has to do with preserving our culture. If you believe in multiculturalism, then you see nothing to preserve. Multiculturalism is
            an ideology based upon the assumption that all cultures are equally good. They are not!

            I don’t believe in multiculturalism. I actually think the Enlightenment proceeded differently in America and the UK because the Americans and the Brits had a different and BETTER culture than was found in France and the rest of Europe.

            Because I value our culture and my countrymen, I think our immigration policy should be designed to strengthen the best characteristics of our society. Ironically, your primary debating point is using the major feature of our culture, our Christian heritage, as an excuse to open our borders in the name of love.

            I see what you call love lacking in the benefit of wisdom. God loves me. So it safe to step off a tall building? The Bible suggests otherwise.

            Matthew 4:5-7 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
            5 Then the devil *took Him into the holy city and had Him stand on the pinnacle of the temple, 6 and *said to Him, “If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down; for it is written,

            ‘He will command His angels concerning You’;

            and

            ‘On their hands they will bear You up,
            So that You will not strike Your foot against a stone.’”

            7 Jesus said to him, “On the other hand, it is written, ‘You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.’”

            I don’t doubt goodness of your intentions. I doubt your wisdom. I think you believe things that are not true.

            Do I hold myself up as THE FONT OF WISDOM? Do I think being white makes me better? No. Most Christian martyrs these days have dark skin. Those people have shown they have more of Christ in them than I. If I knew of a way to favor the immigration of such people I would do so happily, but I don’t. So I will settle for productive people who know how to speak English and want to become Americans.

            Like

          10. Let find a circle of agreement first:

            1. I agree that wisdom isn’t always imparted, but often comes from challenging our own motivations or “assumptions” as you put it. You claim that I am accusing you of having evil assumptions, but I am only saying the same thing you are to me: look inward, question your motivations. If you don’t seriously see the apparent evidence that Trump’s self proclaimed motivations are bigoted, then you may have an even greater need to do this.

            2. I don’t think all cultures are created equal so if that is how you define that “ism” then I don’t belong to it either. On the other hand, I don’t believe that any culture, including ours is without fault and that, although a given culture can be better than others in some things, it can be worse and indeed learn from other cultures in other things. If “multiculturalism” really is the false view that all cultures are equal, then the false view that my culture has perfected a superiority to all rest might be called “culturism”, although historically this has just been called “nationalism” at its best and “fascism” in its worst iterations.

            If our culture is actually superior (more wise?) in some ways to others, ask yourself what our those ways, realizing that one of the ways that we are wise is to admit we are often imperfect? Here might be a short list:

            1. Pluralism. Essentially that means recognizing and embracing the beauty that life is more gratuitous in its diversity of the imperfect than it actually gives us perfection. To make a god out of homogeneity in anything related to “culture” is to create, not only an idol, but an absurd, puffed up clown of an idol at that. If we are truly wise, we are not too proud of our wisdom – language, race, sexuality, ideology, theology, even science, all live in the fantastically diverse range of the exceptions, even more than they do in the rules. God lives in infinite mystery and paradox – He must constantly laugh at our hubris in thinking we’ve figured Him out. Any holistically wise view must live in both its humble embrace of mystery and it’s gratitude for the paradox and tragedy that gives a field to voluntary choice.

            2. Equality. Cultures, like the humans that make them up, are all sinners, even though some may sin more and in different ways than others. All cultures, like the humans that make them up, were somehow mysteriously created in the image of God. As such we should love them as much out of mutual commiseration as sinners as we do out of mutual admiration for that mysterious divinity of its members.
            3. Love. In so far as we are superior to other cultures, it can only be in so far as we have been more loving, in all the forms that love takes (compassion, openness, passionate, sacrificing, etc.).

            This list isn’t all inclusive any more than wisdom is, but the point is that, if we cruelly wall out cultural diversity and jealousy wall in our prideful cultural homogeneity, we have already lost everything that actually makes our culture superior.

            Like

          11. @tsalmon

            That’s funny! You are not a multiculturalist, but you list multiculturalist values as the best features of our culture.

            You really ought to take some responsibility for looking into the nonsense the news media feeds us. Trump’s supposed racism is based mostly on a bunch of quotes taken out of context. After years of such tripe you should know better.

            When we read scripture, something should stand out. Jesus saved us even though we are unworthy. We do awful things to ourselves and each other.

            Has Trump done things he should not have done? Yes. Have his accusers done things they should not have done? Of course they have. That includes lying about Trump.

            Love does not excuse us from dealing with practical problems. Pluralism makes for an interesting variety, but we still need to communicate with each other. If every other person you meet speaks a different language, what are you going to do. Equality seems like a great goal, but what does it mean in practice? Different things to different people, and peoples. Love is a virtue greatly honored by God, but what does God think of love as an excuse for foolishness? You may wish to consider that possibility that God expects us both to love deeply and wisely.

            Like

          12. “That’s funny! You are not a multiculturalist, but you list multiculturalist values as the best features of our culture.”

            Multiculturalists have a club with rules? I bet they have some colorful parties with great food and music.

            I’m not much into the childishness of labeling the opposition with “isms” that they don’t claim and don’t fit. Would it be productive to say that you that you list fascist values? Instead of false labeling, why don’t you just tell me what you think is wrong with the American values of pluralism, equality and acceptance that I listed?

            The great conspiracy of inconvenient facts about Trump’s bigotry is less interesting to me than that you desperately really want to believe Trump’s bigotry is actually moral.

            As for invading languages, I think you may be catastrophizing. The purity of English, like most languages, is the bastard child of generations of whores. Structurally it is Germanic, but most of the words are Latin derivatives with smattering of Greek, French, everything. I child can easily learn more than three languages fluently with no effort. It wouldn’t hurt any of us to learn at least one new language conversationally. Even with as many as 12 million Spanish speakers living here, it’s hardly become the Tower of Babel. Most immigrants for obvious economic reasons
            already know English or are desperately trying to learn it. Within a generation, virtually all do.

            “Love is a virtue greatly honored by God, but what does God think of love as an excuse for foolishness?”

            The Bible often teaches through paradox which makes it easy to claim all sorts of nonsense. However, if you really want to keep minimizing the truth that sacrificial love is THE major theme of the Gospels, then you may wish tt consider that you joined the wrong faith. The foolishness of love? Well, I can’t think of anything more foolish than sacrificing oneself on a cross for me. But there it is.

            Like

          13. @tsalmon

            I keep forgetting that the news media has only given us permission to label Trump and people who wear MAGA hats, and calling Trump and his supporters racists, white supremacists, and white nationalists is okay because there is no “ism” in those words. Guess that means Nazism and white nationalism are out?

            Are Liberal Democrats just progressive and socialist when it makes sense in the name of love? They are not ideologues because progressives and socialist cannot be ideologues by definition? Progressives and socialists are just right, not ideological? Did I mention that Napoleon Bonaparte first used the term “ideologue” and Karl Marx helped to popularize it? Karl Marx just thought he was right too.

            Have I minimized sacrificial love? No. Out of love for us, Jesus Christ gave his life for us. He did so in obedience to the Father. In obedience to God, we must love as Jesus loved. As He did, we must try to sacrifice our lives, dedicate ourselves to His purpose, meaningfully. That requires wisdom, and that’s not something we get out of busybody politicians or rabidly partisan reporters.

            Like

          14. @tsalmon

            Yes. All of it has relevance. Each point was a response to what you wrote.

            You have repeated accusations against Trump. You just assume what you hear in the news reflects the truth about Trump. It doesn’t.

            You have made a big deal about “isms”, but the problem is not “isms”. The problem is which “isms”. We all believe something, but none of us perfectly know what is true. Nevertheless, we still have to believe something as close to the truth as we can get.

            You have made much of sacrificial love. Sacrificial love is what God requires of us, but God also requires our obedience. Does love excuse putting God to the test by taking idiot risks when we have been pointedly told not to do so? Does love excuse willful ignorance of God’s commands? Does love excuse deliberate disobedience?

            Like

          15. Tom,

            Let’s start again with a circle of agreement. I agree completely that true wisdom is coming into a deeper relationship with God, for our faith with Jesus in particular.

            I don’t know what to do with the rest of your obsessions about being picked on by the evil media and evil liberal Democrats. This seems to be your only fall back when you can’t rationally or morally explain Trump’s policy of cruelty toward your brothers and sisters who are by far mostly refugees fleeing abject poverty and extreme violence.

            If we really could just divide the world into a good us and an evil “they”, the solution to every problem would be easy – just kill the “they”, but don’t you see that that way of think is not wisdom – it’s the childish magical thinking of fairy tales. In real life we are ALL good and evil, and we often act with the most cruel and destructive evil when we childishly believe we are on the perfectly good team.

            You say that we can’t be Good Samaritans because these refugees are different culturally, and they would somehow pollute our supposedly superior (good?) culture. Can you explain to me how this excuse is the wisdom that comes from a deeper relationship with God?

            There are practical concerns inherent with helping these poor people in the near term. There are costs. There are risks. The Good Samaritan in Jesus’ story took risks and incurred costs as well, and yet the implication was that the Good Samaritan was wiser than the Jewish priest and lawyer that passed by the injured Israelite without helping. Who had a deeper relationship with God? Who was obeying God? Do you think Jesus was saying that the Good Samaritan was actually poorer or richer for his efforts at helping someone in a different tribe? Would it have changed the meaning of the story if he was a Good Roman or a Good Egyptian and the battered Jew had fled the robbers into his country without permission?

            I’m not saying that we have the right to ask everyone in America to be Jesus and sacrifice everything for our brothers and sisters. This is an excruciatingly complex and difficult problem that will not be solved overnight, if ever, and the most humane and practical of numerous solutions won’t solve it at our border by either opening them up completely or by building a wall so high that the angels couldn’t scale it.

            But the Good Samaritan didn’t solve the problem of the good and evil that exists in every human heart either, now did he? Even Jesus didn’t solve that problem. I think that coming to terms with the reality that Jesus gave everything for Love, but didn’t immediately solve that problem is a good bit of the wisdom that we both are seeking, don’t you?

            Like

          16. Tom,

            That is not the only issue. I wish it were that simple. It would not take anyone trying particularly hard to be wise or loving or just to deal with this humanitarian crisis. Unfortunately, our leadership has just such a simplistic view so they are not really showing very much of the wisdom that we both claim to seek.

            We are going in circles now so I will let this go and we can both dwell on what the other has said here.

            The other day when I was running I had the epiphany that, aside from my wife, you are my best friend. If a friend is someone who loves you enough to patiently challenge your own assumptions so that you grow in wisdom, then you have been a good one. That does not mean that I always ultimately agree with you. I don’t. But you have made me research and meditate on and explore the most important issues in our lives and come to new understandings that I did not have before. In particular, you have challenged me to seek a more direct and mature relationship with the God that I have believed in my whole life. For this, I am very grateful my friend and brother.

            Liked by 2 people

  2. Tom,

    Pope John XXIII’s motto might provide a bit of wisdom for any leader or prophet considering an issue, even all the issues you raise here:

    “In essentials unity, in nonessentials liberty, and in all things charity.”

    Like

    1. @tsalmon

      That’s a good quote, but we still have to distinguish between essentials nonessentials. We also have to understand what is meant by unity.

      What is essential? Each of us has an eternal soul. What could be more important than the salvation of a soul? Everything else is only of passing interest. Hence, Jesus told us to store up our treasures in Heaven.

      What is unity? Can an army of draftees be unified? Not by us. Even God asks for volunteers.

      Read Deuteronomy 20. Here Moses explained how Israel should conduct itself in war. Did Israel have a draft? Yes, but it drafted only those unafraid to fight.

      When God put together an army under Gideon, He chose only those eager to fight (see Judges). It seems that while charity is required to protect the people we love from evil men It is not charitable or even helpful to make people do things they clearly don’t want to do. Otherwise, you would not have to twist arms.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I found that quote in a book about the wisdom that comes from falling into a relationship with God so your interpretation toward the “essential” being salvation is very insightful. Your interpretation of “unity” as a marshal spirit, presumably toward battle between us and they, is also revealing, especially given that you define what is “essential” around Jesus’ message about storing up goods in Heaven where they cannot be subject to thieves (they). See Mathew 6:19, but see also Mathew 19:21, Luke 12:21, 12:33, 18:22, and Hebrews 13:5.

        I’m not saying you’re wrong. What do I know about your relationship with Jesus? But I find it curious that we need to unify into an army to protect our salvation. From whom?

        Like

        1. @tsalmon

          Read Ephesians 6:10-20.

          Then think! Why do we have churches? Why do you go to church? What is fellowship? What is fellowship in Jesus Christ? How does the church spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ? How does the church strengthen each of us so that we can stand against the devil and spread the Gospel?

          Like

          1. Ha! “Think” indeed my beautiful big brother.

            It’s funny. I was almost certain that you would bring up these verses. I have studied this in some detail as well. Ephesians, even with its complex authorship, is wonderfully enlightening. You do realize that Paul is being metaphorical rather than literal here, don’t you? Of course you do.

            Believers are mere flesh and blood, but the evil they battle is not physical in the same sense. Believers need God’s strength and protection to transcend the “temptations” of true evil, the evil that as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn said in the “Gulag Archipelago” “cuts through the heart of every human being”.

            All the metaphorical weapons are primarily defensive and inherently peaceful, virtuous and therefore loving. The only offensive weapon is “the sword of the Spirit” which is “the Word of God” or, in other words, the sharing of the Gospel, and that Word is, as you say, “a dynamic” among believers requiring vigorous sharing, not hoarding and defending. That sword pierces the human heart with God’s love. It burns, but it does not consume. It unites, spiritually protects and welcomes with the eternal light of truth that cannot be quenched by mere men.

            Although the language is symbolically marshal, it does not actually suggest bellicosity, but rather defense through the active practice of God graced love. Paul, as Saul would have been very familiar with actual bellicosity – if he meant for believers to actually go to war, his language would not be so obviously metaphorical. Besides, such a literal bellicose interpretation aiming harm at each other defies the clear context of the Gospel of Love.

            You know all this. 😊

            Like

          2. @tsalmon

            Why would I try to be unpredictable or original? Would that help you to understand? Would I even be correct?

            Have you ever read “A Pilgrim’s Progress” by John Bunyan? It would be worth the time if you have not.

            Are the weapons described in Ephesians 6 metaphorical? That passage clearly says that they are, but the battle is real because the enemy is real. Spiritual warfare is real.
            Consider how Satan tempted Jesus after He had fasted 40 days. Then Jesus demonstrated how to use the Word as a sword.

            We cannot destroy the enemy. Only Jesus has such power. Fortunately, He has given us His Word. When used as a sword the Word forces the devil to flee. When the devil flees, we have the opportunity to spread the Gospel.

            Like

          3. All true Tom, but you might also remember that you know that the Devil lives in ALL of us, as does God. With God’s help, we spiritually war with the Devil IN OURSELVES. With God’s help, we love the image of God in ourselves and everyone else. With God’s help we have no need to fear or hate or war with each other. With the spiritual weapons God gives us “they” can’t hurt us – “they” can only hurt themselves. Don’t you see? “They” are us.

            Like

          4. @tsalmon

            If you have the devil in you, that’s called possession. The devil cannot do that to a Christian because we have the Holy Spirit in us.

            Are we at war with ourselves? Yes. Can the devil tempt us? Yes. God is still at work in us.

            Can we still war with other human beings? Of course we can. Even when you want to do the right thing by another person, that other person may not respect your person. It is wishful thinking to believe otherwise. We still need military and police forces.

            Like

          5. As for “Pilgrims Progress” I read it a long time ago, and I mostly remember that I hated it. I was so much more stupid then than I am now and I am so much more stupid now than (with your help sometimes) I hope to someday be. Thanks for the suggestion. I’ll put it on my reading list.

            Liked by 1 person

      2. “The devil cannot do that to a Christian because we have the Holy Spirit in us.”

        I’m not sure that I understand the point you are making in reference to the Ephesians verses. You know it’s not one and done. Nothing about being saved keeps a sinner from temptation, or backsliding out of a state of grace. We are all still sinners subject to temptation, and thus in need of just the spiritual armor that Paul eludes to.

        “Can we still war with other human beings? Of course we can. Even when you want to do the right thing by another person, that other person may not respect your person. It is wishful thinking to believe otherwise. We still need military and police forces.”

        These are other issues. The quote was:

        “In essentials unity, in nonessentials liberty, and in all things charity.”

        We seem to agree on essentials. Some civil disagreement is healthy. But we also seem agree that, on things nonessential, we should err on the side of freedom. However, do you honestly think that there is something in the message of Jesus that should make us fight, divide and hurt each other for what is nonessential? Wasn’t that exactly the kind of prideful us/they squabbling that Paul was trying to prevent? How is an assumption that the other side is evil actually charitable?

        Tom, being charitable, most of the political infighting in this country is over issues that are intractable and as such have few perfectly practical and moral solutions. If we were charitable and wise, we’d realize that the other side may be mistaken on either the moral or the practical side, but they don’t believe their intentions are evil. Do you think wise are wise and being lead by wise people?

        Until Republicans or Democrats solve the problem of sin in the human heart (not going to happen) then we will always have problems with things like immigration. The best we do is create a balance between competing moral and practical goods and evils that is better and wiser than it was before. Us/they divisions over the slightly better of imperfect solutions just makes the problem worse and it does not sound like something Jesus wants us to do, does it?

        Like

        1. @tsalmon

          The Bible speaks of demon possession as a real thing. Don’t pretend to understand it. Just an observation. If you are inhabited by the Holy Spirit, His living temple, then what would the devil doing in you? Is there direct scriptural support for that observation. Not sure.

          The Apostle Paul said Jesus forgave him for killing Christians. Why? Saul did not know any better. Even otherwise smart and well-meaning people have some dreadful beliefs.

          Your government cannot eliminate sin so we have to create some sort of balance?😟

          I think it is essential for our country to have and enforce its borders. I don’t want what might be otherwise smart and well-meaning people coming here and creating unnecessary strife. You want to be charitable? You give in. Sounds like a good balance to me.

          The balance is limited government. If you want people fighting over the government, then don’t insist upon making it so important.

          Like

          1. “The Bible speaks of demon possession as a real thing. Don’t pretend to understand it. Just an observation. If you are inhabited by the Holy Spirit, His living temple, then what would the devil doing in you? Is there direct scriptural support for that observation. Not sure.”

            Interesting. I recently read in a book that “the best word for God is actually “Mystery”. In the same book religious scholar Richard Rohr wrote this and it stuck me as a rather profound paradox for any of us who wish to formalize God’s rule’s into our own rational universals:

            “Every time God forgives us, God is saying that God’s rules do not matter as much as the relationship God wants to create with us.”

            By the Jewish mores of the time, Jesus was scandalous, cavorting with the poor, the sinful, the unclean, tax collectors, Samaritans, even on the Sabbath. As Rohr points out, Jesus was never upset with sinners (check it out); He is only upset with people that do not think they are sinners.”

            God leaves the 99 for one lost sheep. As soon as we get comfortable in universal, rational, predictable rules, God seems to create an exception and leaves us reeling. Rohr says that some scholars call this “the scandal of the particular”. We are creatures of the Enlightenment. The thing that modern believers must get comfortable with and that nonbelievers never can is that from a purely rational perspective, life is as Shakespeare said, “a tail told by an idiot full of sound and fury signifying nothing”. In other words, to find the real meaning, we need to happily and with joy and love, embrace the tragedy of life and grow beyond, no through, the tragedy to find something that rises above all the paradoxical dualisms.

            Perhaps, this is what you mean about God’s forgiveness of Paul.

            “Your government cannot eliminate sin so we have to create some sort of balance?😟”

            I think you might consider trying to read more carefully and try understand what people are positing. Otherwise, you end up making unnecessary arguments where disagreement may not exist. I don’t think that government will solve the problem of sin. Just the opposite. I said the problem of sin is beyond both Democratic and Republican solutions. The problem of sin exists in the human heart.

            Poverty, immigration, famine, etc. are tragedies where the connection to sin may be obvious or tenuous or even nonexistent. Sometimes bad shit just happens. On the other hand, with what humility we, as individuals in a democratic government, try to handle the tragedies of life with cruelty and selfishness or with loving virtue can be sin or salvation. Turning a blind eye to what OUR government does is just a sin of omission. An imperfect multi-prong solution exists in an almost endless range of cost/benefit analyses that is not cruelly practical nor foolishly generous. Right now, lead by the divider-in-chief Republicans and Democrats are just calling each other names, whether deserved or not.

            “I think it is essential for our country to have and enforce its borders. I don’t want what might be otherwise smart and well-meaning people coming here and creating unnecessary strife. You want to be charitable? You give in. Sounds like a good balance to me.”

            I think that you have a rather self serving concept of being charitable.😉

            “The balance is limited government. If you want people fighting over the government, then don’t insist upon making it so important.”

            At best (being charitable), this is a non sequitur. At worst it is hypocrisy. A government that was diminished wouldn’t separate families, ask for citizenship papers, build a Wall, become more and more of a federal police state. In this instance, who is really making government more important?

            Like

  3. Tom, Doug, Sue, Tsalmon

    Sue commented “And good luck finding American made fabric – let alone clothing off the rack. Even the so-called better brands are tissue thin. “

    What most people who comment against Trump’s tariff wars with China is because they do not understand how interrelationship every manufacturing industry.
    For example, when China supply’s the majority of clothing to the USA as anyone knows who check the labels in any store, what happened is the USA mills no longer supply the textile products to the clothing manufacturers.

    These same chains apply to every manufactured product, send the manufacturing of any widget out and the local suppliers around the manufacture also close down and jobs are eliminated not only for the workers in the plant making the product, but the accountants, the customer service employees all lose the stores and restaurants around the plants, etc. all are affected.

    This following statement about the textile industry can be applied to every story of a manufactured product sent out of the USA /

    “Selecting finished goods, which generally contain 100-percent Chinese fiber, yarn, and fabric components, would create benefits throughout the U.S. supply chain.”

    If interested, read the link and the statements why they support Trump.

    https://www.textileworld.com/textile-world/features/2019/05/2019-state-of-the-u-s-textile-industry/

    Regards and goodwill blogging.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. 1. Trump is no god except to himself.
      2. Trump is, in fact, the Chosen One to his own base.. nothing more.
      3. Trump knows not what he does… and expresses it daily.

      You said it perfectly.. few people understand the interrelationship of manufacturing, and Trump himself is one. Trump was lamenting about using tariffs during the campaign to get China to acquiesce to “playing fair”. Again… what resources was HE using to have any understanding at all the interrelationships of levying tariffs on anyone? He’s a blunt force instrument. All he knows is real estate.. and even that is just barely. He’s know more how to leverage TV exposure to his benefit than understanding business. You just don’t wake up one morning and begin to levy tariffs without some consideration to ripple effects, political reactions, who these tariffs might affect down the chain, etc. Just finding some loyalist economist to agree with your idea does NOT make your idea workable at all.
      Ok.. great.. the textile industry is doing great (and pardon me if I don’t take to heart what a Trump loyalist happens to say in that article). What about those red state folks who fell for his campaign promises with manufacturing?
      You’re trying to legitimize a demagoguery persona by suggesting his actions were thought out and calculated. He’s never done that and never will.

      Like

      1. All he knows is real estate.. and even that is just barely. He’s know more how to leverage TV exposure to his benefit than understanding business.

        He has run hundreds of successful enterprises. Kind of hard to look in the face of facts and say he knows nothing about anything…but those folks who have never run a business at all and never worked outside of a bureaucracy are the real experts.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Whatever his magic number of “owned” businesses the vast majority were likely holding companies and trusts set up by attorneys. Running a country is NOT like running a business. A business owner is always conscious of the bottom line.. profit & loss as a motivator for making business decisions. What we PRESUME incorrectly, is that being a business owner somehow equates to business leadership and management and it does not. This is why so many garage-built high tech Silicon Valley entrepreneurs struggle with day-to-day management. Most got to be those owners because they fostered an idea and/or had a vision they took to fruition. A large number succeeded in spite of themselves. It does not mean they know how to manage people… much less be President. Trump is not nor ever has been a manager of people. He is unable to work in a team environment nor build a team to meet certain goals. He made his money because daddy provided seed money and Trump did well leveraging that and maintaining a good inertia. Again.. his strength is that he is his own best promoter. If he could just channel that for some national good that would be a plus. But, not for him.
          It’s a lot like being an officer in the military. I’ll take an infantry Captain any day to do a job that requires teamwork to accomplish a goal or reach an objective before I’d take an Air Force pilot also a Captain. On the other hand.. if I needed a job done by one man and let him/her run with it, I’d pick the USAF Captain. It’s called delegation of responsibilities to meet the mission. Trump can’t even do that much. Just look at the incompetent businessmen he’s hired for cabinet positions.
          So.. no… he is a businessman who made money but he didn’t create anything to get it. If anything he got his money taking advantage of others in some form.
          I know what I am talking about.

          Like

      2. Doug,

        Compared to Hllary, I surmise God intervened so that Trump would be “chosen” instead of her.

        In my opinion, the only reason. China backed out of their original trade agreements is because of the Tdump haters. They think he will lose the 2020 election and then not have to balance trade.

        So keep on helping them. Oont think that they are not reading all the Trump haters social media and CNN fools, iny opinion.

        Regards and goodwill blogging

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Rudy.. that was two years ago. Why do Conservatives always have to bring up Hillary?? That’s ancient history. Trump won. I hear/read more “Clinton” garbage from Conservatives than I ever heard from Liberals who wish she had won. This is the best one.. “Just imagine where we’d be if she had won!” Well.. yeah… ok… we’d certainly NOT be where we are at now… and while we are from two separate views as to what that means.. we can both agree that’s a true statement. But in the end.. so what.

          Like

          1. Doug,

            Well we would not be debating China if she won and since she stated she is for open borders we probably would not be debating immigration.

            You decide if either is what you support..

            Regards and goodwill blogging

            Liked by 1 person

          2. @Doug

            When Liberal Democrats tell me they are not for open borders, I ask how is it they would control the borders. They never have a proposal that makes sense. Legalizing illegal immigration does control who can and who cannot come into our country. It just opens our borders.

            That’s

            Like

          3. @Doug

            When a little child stands there with chocolate stains and cookies crumbs around his mouth and on his hands and clothes, it is silly to argue with him when he denies stealing from the cookie jar.

            Like

          4. When Liberal Democrats tell me they are not for open borders, I ask how is it they would control the borders. They never have a proposal that makes sense. Legalizing illegal immigration does control who can and who cannot come into our country. It just opens our borders.

            Yep. See how Doug ignored this again?
            Response (during the rare times there is a response) is always either word salad or distraction. Never a straight answer. Never any solution. The “decriminalization” suggestion (Doug is ignoring) is exactly that…no enforcement means no law.

            Liked by 1 person

          5. Tom, Liz, et al…

            Nice try to bait me, Liz. But I’ve written more on some attempt at a “path” toward a solution than the two of you combined. The reason I said “path” is because none of us can possibly have the entire picture of all the side concerns about immigration policy and the requirements in gauging the numbers simply because we don’t have access. Immigration policy has to be taken in segments, whether it’s all about the science of future age groups vs workforce vs Medicare recipients vs whatever else there is BEYOND just the emotionally imagined preferred personality types, income and educational levels. Immigration policy includes much more than that.
            So… given that…. read to your heart’s content…

            http://freestatesman.us/immigration-are-not-refugees/
            (posted July 3, 2018)

            http://freestatesman.us/the-refugee-doctrine/
            (posted Nov. 28, 2018)

            Like

          6. Nice try to bait me, Liz. But I’ve written more on some attempt at a “path” toward a solution than the two of you combined.
            I had no idea that you’ve read everything I’ve ever written.
            I’m sure I don’t even remember five percent of what I’ve written over the years so I’ll have to take your word for it.

            The reason I said “path” is because none of us can possibly have the entire picture of all the side concerns about immigration policy and the requirements in gauging the numbers simply because we don’t have access.
            I don’t disagree with that. Assuming the above is a foregone conclusion, what is your basis for criticism? “I don’t know the actual facts, but I know Trump is always wrong!”

            Immigration policy has to be taken in segments, whether it’s all about the science of future age groups vs workforce vs Medicare recipients vs whatever else there is BEYOND just the emotionally imagined preferred personality types, income and educational levels. Immigration policy includes much more than that.
            The above bolded portion makes no sense…unless you are asserting that differences in education and income levels, and “personality types” are imagined.
            Which is both a fallacy…those are all very real things….and also, ironically, a non-sensical and…well, very emotionally driven claim.
            Personalities do differ, and do in fact matter. California prisons, for example, are filled with Mexican gang members who are personalities we’d be better off without. One might posit, as a statement of the obvious, if these refugees are fleeing from terrible countries…what is to stop some of these terrible people from coming? Why assume everyone coming from countries so terrible they believe they should qualify for asylum status…is good?

            So… given that…. read to your heart’s content…
            http://freestatesman.us/immigration-are-not-refugees/
            (posted July 3, 2018)
            http://freestatesman.us/the-refugee-doctrine/
            (posted Nov. 28, 2018)

            I read and commented on the last one before.
            Likely through the Organization of American States (or a new organization), we develop a new doctrine, perhaps limited to Central American countries and those bordering north South America, the United State will intervene diplomatically (first) to contain any potential refugee threat, up to and including removal of the head of state in order to restore order; that such impending government collapse would pose a direct threat to the safety and security of the Americas and their peoples. 

            We do interfere diplomatically already. I’m sorry, I cannot comment again on the idea of taking out heads of state in the interest of “stability”. I can point you to the definition of insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. We’ve been to that rodeo so many times…and recently. To the tune of massive instability and trillions in lost dollars.

            Liked by 1 person

          7. Here’s the rather hypocritical idea regarding only admitting those with an ability to produce (which is exactly what you are saying)… there are umpteen million already here for decades, legal and illegal, because no one in government wanted to address the problem because it really wasn’t a problem… and their children already fit the parameter.. yet you want to round them all up and ship them out (impossible as that is).

            Regardless…. what’s your solution?

            Like

          8. @Doug

            It was not a problem? That’s unmitigated BS. We had an amnesty in 1986. 1986! In return for the amnesty, Congress was suppose to past legislation to fix the problem, and the president was suppose to enforce the law. They lied. They LIED!

            There isn’t any sign the cheap labor/cheap vote faction has any intention of negotiating with sincerity. GREED is difficult to negotiate with. So, Conservatives see no point in another amnesty until we have immigration under control.

            Will the absence of an amnesty force some of the illegals who have been here for years to leave? If we succeed in putting enough pressure on employers and force them to check the legal status of their employees, I suppose so.

            Government is a blunt and unwieldy instrument. If greedy people had not manipulated the system, we would not have this problem. Why don’t you blame them? Noooooooo! It’s Trump’s fault. After all, he was alive in 1986.

            Like

          9. Yeah, well.. if he’s been the Chosen One all along where was he in 1986 to deliver us from all this evil? Seems if one is to do some amnesty thing one might impose on Congress to include in the same bill all the rest of the stuff. And.. YES… who’s supposed to be enforcing the businesses who hire these folks illegally?

            Like

          10. @Doug

            What has Trump’s sarcasm got to do with this? The guy can’t even make a self-deprecating joke without the chosen ones in the news media taking him seriously.

            Can Trump punish employers who hire illegal aliens. There does have to be laws in place for that.

            Another problem. Politics is the art of the possible. Nobody even knows how many illegal aliens are in the country. He cannot round them up and throw them out all at once. It would create havoc. First, we have to get our borders under control. That includes the people who overstay their visas. Then we have to get employers to verify the status of their employees. Then we have to get a merit-based immigration system.

            Lots of this stuff requires new laws. Will not happen with a Democrat Congress.

            Like

          11. Regardless…. what’s your solution?

            I think having Mexico police their side of the border (if they live up to their side of the deal) is a great idea. And we police ours. Let those who enter know that the process will not be easy, and it might be uncomfortable and take a long while…rather than, “come on over, we’re forcing the federal government to let you in!” See what happened in Haiti when the president at that time (guess who?) told them all they were welcome. They made 1000 leaky boats and came over. There’s a lesson there. Was it more humane to welcome them, then turn the boats away and let them all drown? Or to tell them they weren’t permitted in the first place so don’t try it. I know what worked best, and I know which option I think is more humane. Thought this was obvious but it doesn’t seem so to the left.

            Liked by 1 person

          12. You’ve boiled the entire immigration problem down to one paragraph that simply says “let Mexico deal with it”.. and the main deterrent to stop people from coming here is that “it won’t be easy”?? You and Tom challenge me for some “solution” to immigration in general and I present two posts that explain “something” and all you can submit is some variant.. “what Trump’s doing is wonderful”? A rather pathetic “Lead on, MacDuff.” I’ll follow you to the ends of the earth.

            With all the cerebral exercise that goes on in here there are very very few attempts to present a solution to anything.

            Like

          13. BTW, you’re not going to like to hear this but if Mexico takes up the resource slack and we save that money and that money goes into the wall, it can be said that Mexico is (essentially) paying for the wall.

            Liked by 1 person

          14. Here’s the rather hypocritical idea regarding only admitting those with an ability to produce (which is exactly what you are saying)… there are umpteen million already here for decades, legal and illegal, because no one in government wanted to address the problem because it really wasn’t a problem…

            Oh goodness….yes, you’re right. There are already umpteen million unskilled illegals here. That’s a clear reason not to screen and just keep on letting umpteen more in! How hypocritical of me to think otherwise. No problems there.
            Good grief Doug.

            Liked by 1 person

          15. Who said anything about NOT screening? What I am saying is that if screening it should not be for emotionally biased political reasons. You Conservatives are so wrapped up in this idea that somehow all illegals are leeches on society… when even the government numbers never supported that from day one.. it was all in Trump’s biased orange head.

            Like

          16. You’ve boiled the entire immigration problem down to one paragraph that simply says “let Mexico deal with it”..
            Mexico and us. We still control who comes over, but it would be nice if they would stop and screen first rather than just letting them all over to swarm the border en masse. I recognize the tactic because Italy did that as well for a while. It was a mess for the rest of Europe.

            and the main deterrent to stop people from coming here is that “it won’t be easy”??
            It worked pretty well when Trump was first elected. Only after the Democrats assured illegals they were welcome and they’d do everything they could to stop ICE (California laws for three day notice search warrants…seriously? Is there any question this is an open invitation?)…did we see the giant “in your face Trump” convoys.
            Or again, see the Haiti boats. That is a direct example. I can not think of a better one.

            You and Tom challenge me for some “solution” to immigration in general and I present two posts that explain “something” and all you can submit is some variant.. “what Trump’s doing is wonderful”?
            Why do I have to disagree with what Trump is doing? You mentioned that Mexico screening is a version of what you recommended….but of course, since it’s Trump you have believe it’s a horrible idea and, oh yeah, let’s police all of South America and take out leadership instead.

            Who said anything about NOT screening? What I am saying is that if screening it should not be for emotionally biased political reasons.
            Screening for accomplishment, skill sets, “personalities” are not emotionally biased things. These are concrete things.

            You Conservatives are so wrapped up in this idea that somehow all illegals are leeches on society
            You’re a mind reader Doug!
            Wow…I can read your mind too. Why do you hate puppies?!?
            That’s so weird.

            Liked by 1 person

  4. Tom,

    Have you thought about the fact that seeking asylum is not “illegal”? Have you thought about the fact that refusing asylum claims is “illegal”? Have you thought about the fact that not providing due process for alleged claims and crimes is “illegal” (not to mention unconstitutional)?

    More generally have you thought about why something should be “illegal”? What is justice? What morality is it based on? Is that morality for justice universal (applying to all humans) or is it tribal? Is the most just outcome always black and white or does it often balance and compromise against each other conflicting rights versus conflicting responsibilities? What is the difference between distributive justice and procedural justice? Can you have one without the other? If justice is about preventing victims of injustice, then is it just for us victimize one group in a major way in order to prevent the rather minor victimization of another? Does the very complex and nuanced balancing of these equities call for the wisdom of virtue, expertise, experience and compromise?

    Like

    1. @tsalmon

      Would you quit mimicking the silly virtue signaling of the mainstream news media and think? You are not talking about asylum. You are repeating a lame excuse for open, uncontrolled borders.

      Have you thought about the fact the Pharisees were up to their necks in nuances? If we ignore the spirit behind the law just to get our own way, we miss the benefit of having a law. And the Pharisees missed by a mile.

      When we connive like Liberal Democrats to give everyone who asks asylum, we cannot grant anyone asylum. We don’t have a functional border. We are not able to protect ourselves, much less the people who actually need asylum. The gangs they are supposedly trying to escape just come with them.

      Like

      1. “Would you quit mimicking the silly virtue signaling of the mainstream news media and think? You are not talking about asylum. You are repeating a lame excuse for open, uncontrolled borders.”

        I did that? Where?

        “Have you thought about the fact the Pharisees were up to their necks in nuances? If we ignore the spirit behind the law just to get our own way, we miss the benefit of having a law. And the Pharisees missed by a mile.“

        I agree that the Pharisees missed the loving spirit of the law and saw it in black and white terms. That, by definition, means they substituted wooden literalism for nuance. In other words, your understanding of the word “nuance” seems to lack any nuance.😉

        “When we connive like Liberal Democrats to give everyone who asks asylum, we cannot grant anyone asylum. We don’t have a functional border. We are not able to protect ourselves, much less the people who actually need asylum. The gangs they are supposedly trying to escape just come with them.“

        I agree completely with your underlying sentiment, but can’t you see how your reasoning is fraught erroneous assumptions:

        1. Mind reading. You assume I am for something that I not and have never advocated.
        2. Mislabeling. I don’t strictly identify with either Party but you desperately need to label everyone into us and they. You also assume an extreme position to ALL Democrats when there is actually a good bit of difference of knowledge and opinion within both Parties. Until recently Republicans were not at all anti-immigrant, and I think even now most Republicans of goodwill have compassion for refugees.
        3. Over-generalizing. Who is advocating for giving “everyone” asylum?
        4. Binary thinking. People exist on a spectrum of good verses evil and my experience is that very few people actually exist at the extremes. One of the first virtues of any healthy effort at problem solving is to begin with a charitable attitude about your brother’s intentions.
        5. Catastrophizing. Life is about risk. How much of our humanity should we give up to be perfectly safe? Seriously, what is the real risk that gangs will come in, take over and make the whole country unsafe? Have you actually done any risk analysis on all this?

        Like

        1. @tsalmon

          The Pharisees did not apply wooden literalism to the law. They substituted the traditions of men. The twisted the law to mean what they wanted it to mean. Instead of humbly obeying God, they modified the law to glorify themselves.

          When we permit people seeking asylum to come to our country, we have enough trouble with the way the process is supposed to work. Remember when Fidel Castro opened the doors of his prisons and sent a bunch of criminals here as “political refugees”. Because we don’t read minds, we cannot easily separate the good from the bad, the real asylum seeker from an opportunist.. Yet for the sake of our own people, we must do our best, and Liberal Democrats don’t want that.

          The Democrats are using children as human shields to pry our borders open and flood our country with people whose votes they think they can buy. Our elites just see dollars signs and cheap labor. Gullible Democrat voters just see the word “free” or an opportunity to show how much “love” they have with other people’s money and security.

          Wiser heads look at California and demand an end to such asinine nonsense. It doesn’t help anyone except political parasites to flood our nation with endless waves of poor and ignorant people. All it will accomplish is the destruction of our republic and the loss of our prosperity, the very thing that is attracting your so-called asylum seekers.

          Like

          1. “The Pharisees did not apply wooden literalism to the law. They substituted the traditions of men. The twisted the law to mean what they wanted it to mean. Instead of humbly obeying God, they modified the law to glorify themselves.”

            Ok, you win. The color is not green or yellow – it’s chartreuse. Your view is more nuanced than mine. 😊

            As to asylum, I agree with your underlying sentiment. To a large extent, we are a common people of asylum seekers and slaves escaping bondage who came to this promised land where we hope to live in peace and harmony under common traditions of equality and justice. We are willing to repel invaders who wish to challenge those traditions. We are willing to accept strangers, often more desperate than our own ancestors, if they seek to abide by those traditions. Beyond that there are endless practical considerations and problems that must be overcome, few of which have black and white humane solutions.

            Can you see how both or either political party engaging in numerous rational distortions like the ones I listed above might be unhelpful?

            Like

          2. @tsalmon

            With respect to the Pharisees, I just summarized what Jesus said. Try reading Mark 7:1-23 and Matthew 23.

            The Pharisees were for the most part at least trying. The Sadduces, who dominated the Sanhedrin, did not even believe in an afterlife.

            The Apostle Paul and Nicodemus were Pharisees. I don’t recall any Sadducees who converted.

            What you have to say about immigration is for part a smoke screen. Except for the fact you will not concur with and approve of any practical solutions which would allow our government to enforce the border, we are in complete agreement.

            We don’t have perfect solutions. All we can do is our best and beg forgiveness for our sins and imperfections. Read Luke 18:9-14.

            Like

          3. Thanks for the Bible lesson.

            I think both of us could learn more from the words and acts of Jesus in advocating for wise leaders who will work together like grown ups to find the most loving and practical solutions.

            Like

  5. Keep in mind that while everyone is painting China as some threat we better be aware at who we are wanting to flex our muscle against. Why? Well, in spite of all you anti-globalists knocking globalism… if China suffers then the world markets suffer. We are not talking about the old Soviet Union and the Cold War military theatrics here. The old Soviet Union (and contemporary Russia) never were economic competitors or even much as a contributor to the world economy back then. The world markets, meaning us, are knee-deep in China’s economy… and how they might struggle internally. They have 1.5 billion people to control over there given their own economic internal disparity between rural and urban life… and the occasional democratic reformers who periodically raise a ruckus like currently in Hong Kong.
    I am by no means suggesting that China should run slipshod over international trade… but keeping aware that this is an economic, political, and military game we’ve never played before we should be careful how far to push these folks to make sure our various forms of getting them to comply with us doesn’t destabilize the population.

    Makes one rather wish we had the old State Department back, and we had a president that listened to his own intel agencies.

    Like

    1. Makes one rather wish we had the old State Department back

      Yeah, things were great when we were invading countries that abided by their disarmament agreements, ISIS was thriving, and any form of stability in the ME was toppling like dominoes. Great times! If only we could have those back so we’d have something to talk about.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Liz,

        Who needs a state department? Who needs a complex geopolitical strategy? Who needs to see nuance? Who needs diplomacy? Who need expertise? The Messiah-and-Chief chosen one can just buy China, right?

        When everything reduces down to black and white, us against them thinking then nothing is too absurd, now is it?😆

        Like

          1. Actually.. you are correct. I actually miss more than the previous State Department.. but more importantly I miss previous presidents. Just pick one.
            Enjoy this clown while you have him, Liz. You thought yesterday was nuts.. there’s more to come and gonna get worse.

            Like

          2. I actually miss more than the previous State Department..

            Yeah, it gave our military something to do.
            I’m sure they miss those deployments and really wish there was a no fly zone so they could fly test patterns over Syria right now. Maybe they’d deploy some more people to work with ebola patients…
            like they signed on to do when they took that oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies”.
            This guy in charge now sure is a maniac!
            -Liz out

            Liked by 1 person

    2. @Doug

      You didn’t say anything except you have no idea what we should do, and you don’t trust Trump.

      China is a dangerous adversary. That is the choice THEY have made. All Trump is doing is telling China we won’t want be robbed anymore. If China wants to trade with us, they must play by the rules and stand by their agreements.

      If you CAREFULLY look what Trump has done, you should be able to observe he has taken a measured approach. He has done his best to implement those tariffs as slowly as possible. Moreover, he has avoided talking about the Hong Kong demonstrations. He is not antagonizing the Chinese or making false promises to the demonstrators. Instead, he is build up our defenses, working with allies, and encouraging American corporations to find some place to do business besides China.

      Hate to say it, but I doubt China will behave better. My guess is that their economy is going to stumble because of its own government’s interference. Then that government is going to look where to place blame and hide its sins in foreign conflicts. War is not far off. Never is.

      Like

      1. This is about economics, not military might. No.. you just can’t tinker away at things you know nothing about because we, as a nation, haven’t been here before, nor has China. No business is just going to up and leave China on Trump’s word. Regardless.. if you think China’s economy is going to falter under Trump’s “threats” then you best be concerned about our economy and the rest of Asia if not also Europe.
        Here’s a lesson for you, Tom… every presidential administration cannot address effectively all issues, domestic and international in scope, in a single or even two-term effort. Trump came on board, as he did with ALL his other issues, with preconceived biases and faulty numbers and made them into campaign issues. Trade with China was not even on the priority list of previous administrations for a reason… the were other more important issues and the economy was prospering regardless. EVERY single issue the red states voted for Trump to remedy he’s made worse because the real issues were never communicated and addressed properly… and realized that their problems were NOT vanishing manufacturing jobs to overseas but rather the market and technology making the jobs vanish.. and the real problem is trying to re-train or provide regional aid to these help these folks.. not give them bogus “enemies” to point fingers at. It’s all his trade and tariff boondoggles that are threatening our current economy… and… our international relations around the world.

        Jeez, Tom.. working with our allies??? Who? He’s going to the G7 and the other leaders are apprehensive of Trump going off the rails there as usual. This is making America great? Not in my book.

        Like

        1. @Doug

          Go into a store. Not everything is made in China.

          China makes its neighbors nervous. Thanks to its economic growth, which our foolish trade policies have subsidized, Chiina has become much more dangerous to its neighbors. So Trump is using the threat of tariffs to eencourage businesses to relocate. When business people see instability, the want no part of it, and Trump is highlighting the instability in China.

          Like

          1. @Doug

            What evidence can you provide that you know what you are talking about? All you have done is whine about Trump while speaking in broad generalities.

            Trump has convinced even the Democrats in Congress that something has to be done about China. That’s huge. Still, the political class these days is gutless. They want Trump to take all the risk. Thank the Lord we have a leader willing to take some responsibility.

            Like

          2. I know you prefer to address Trump and his buffoonery through his policies and not his methods and I am the reverse. I’m not suggesting his direction to confront China and their long history of not playing fair is not warranted. What I am saying, and have always said, is Trump attacks each and every problem with a huge measure of personal bias (meaning offical government numbers mean nothing to him, he’s stuck in some world from the 1950’s/60’s and presumes it’s all relevant today, and he screws with the Constitution constantly, like the 14th Amendment lately).
            And his lies are appalling more than anything. China lost 2 million jobs?? Companies are leaving there in droves?? Exercise simple rule of reasonableness… how can that happen so quick and why are we not feeling it here? All we are feeling so far is the effects of his tariffs on the farmers and the markets. Sorry, Tom… it makes no sense at all.
            Funny thing though… Trump opens his mouth and nobody believes a word he says (other than his base) and the fatigue factor is getting worse each time he does his chopper talk. We can’t even believe our own president. That doesn’t bother you?

            Like

          3. Here ya go, Tom…

            https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/23/business/recession-trade-war-tax-cuts/index.html

            https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/confidence-in-agriculture-has-fallen-thanks-to-us-china-trade-war-711-ranch-manager
            (the article and links inside it too)

            https://video.foxbusiness.com/v/6074346309001/#sp=show-clips
            (video suggesting your previous reply about Trump holding back about Hong Kong is not the case and will get worse)

            You will note some of this is from FOX…

            Like

          4. @Doug

            Whenever we have a Republican president, the news media starts warning us about a recession, if nothing else is working. That’s SOP.

            So Trump warned China that murdering a bunch of people in Hong Kong would jeopardize a trade agreement? That’s not obviously true? It was the least Trump could say. He had to say something. So he said the obvious.

            China was suppose to let Hong Kong run its own local government. That’s was an agreement the Brits made with China when they gave up Hong Kong, and they lied. So right after they show they cannot be trusted and kill a bunch of people we are suppose to make an agreement with them? Seriously?

            In the near future we will probably see the China army move into Hong Kong. Then they people will try to demonstrate, and the Chinese Army will try to quietly suppress those demonstrations.

            Pray.

            Like

        2. Trade with China was not even on the priority list of previous administrations for a reason… the were other more important issues and the economy was prospering regardless.

          During this timeframe, we became purposefully dependent on a nation that caused aircraft failures, poisonings, construction collapses and corrosions, inundates the world with counterfeit products, steals our intellectual property and is a direct threat to our security. But, hey….our agriculture might be impacted if we don’t continue this status quo. Well, up until now many many industries have been impacted for us to be in this situation of dependency. Last I read (and this was years ago so it’s probably far worse now), at least one out of five cups of rice grown in China is riddled with toxic levels of metallic impurities.

          The Department of Defense was using Chinese manufactured computers and blackberries and the government was blind deaf and dumb to the obvious security risk…but oh, those Russian troll farms. They might influence random dummies that’s the REAL threat to our freedom. This is darkly humorous parody…I do with it were the Onion and not our reality. I wish the people responsible for making these horrible decisions were the one punished for them, but unfortunately at this point that’s not how it goes. Doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Just to add (in case this was vague):
            at least one out of five cups of rice grown in China is riddled with toxic levels of metallic impurities.
            Which means their food can’t be trusted…the reason they import so much from us. They’ll be importing either way. Maybe not from us, but they sure aren’t importing as a favor.

            Liked by 1 person

  6. You’re probably aware of that transcript floating around, of Dean Baquet, exec editor of the NY Times, meeting with staffers. I’ve read the whole thing 3 times, and just posted about it. “In a nutshell”, he’s saying the NYT is launching the “1619 Project” to “teach” their readers “how to think about slavery and racism”, because this new distorted narrative about our history is the most effective way of undermining Trump. What it mostly comes down to for the “elites” is putting narrative before integrity.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. @iamcurmudgeon

      Yeah! I heard about that on Rush Limbaugh’s show. I don’t necessarily agree, however, that the Liberal Democrats hate Trump because they are globalists. Globalism is just their means to accessing cheap labor. I think their thinking is more in tune with the thinking of the Old South and Communism. They see themselves as the indispensable leaders, the slave masters, the vanguard. Whereas they are actually just greedy busybodies.

      Some people’s pride makes them insist upon being in charge, but are too lazy to think through or just indifferent to the consequences of what they want to do. All they care about is what makes them feel good about themselves. Lots of virtue signaling, but not not much virtuous living. Such people include most of us.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Tom, I didn’t listen to Rush—my hearing is too poor—but I read about it on TheResurgent.com, and followed their link to Slate. Erick Erickson has written three excellent posts on the 1619Project, on TheResurgent. The latest one explains how the United States has atoned for slavery by the blood shed in the Civil War. He shows how Lincoln understood that, and explains the words of the Battle Hymn of the Republic are about atonement through the shedding of blood, which is God’s requirement for the atonement of sin. Just try to explain that idea to the New York Times!

        Liked by 1 person

        1. @iamcurmudgeon

          Rushlimbaugh posts transcripts of his talk show on his website (rushlimbaugh.com). You may find them worth scanning.

          Will have to check out TheResurgent.com.

          Try to explain atonement to the New York Times? Scary thought.

          Our country is split between two camps who have vastly different worldviews. Ever notice how Liberal Democrats have fixations on things like tribalism, racism, and sexism, but they rarely talk about religious discrimination. Why? They don’t have problem with religious discrimination. They are multiculturalists because they think all religious beliefs are equally false. They believe in science, after it has been politically corrected, of course.

          When we assume God does not matter, we have a different view of man’s place in the world, a different set of assumption from those who see God, not man, as supreme.

          Like

  7. And good luck finding American made fabric – let alone clothing off the rack. Even the so-called better brands are tissuey thin. It’s really ridiculous, when men’s jeans are of thin material. When my husband worked in the warehouse, his jeans held up alot better than years later, when his health kept him from lifting heavy objects. And i have always bought him quality stuff, just because.

    All this imported crap just gets cheesier and cheesier. i don’t blame the chinese people; they get treated like crap in those slave-mills.

    Such happens, when any society tells Jesus Christ to go the heck away, and stay away.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Americans still have experts in the technology, but I guess the cloth mills in this country are scarce.

      Still, it is as you suggest. If our nation returns to Jesus, we may not become rich a material sense, but He provides the best for those who love Him. The Lord God, the One who cares for sparrows, will care for us too.

      Like

      1. We sold our textile looms long ago…remember Berkshire Hathaway (Warren Buffet’s company) started out as a textile operation. He sold the last of that industry in the mid-80s.
        People are good at ignoring things they can’t see. For example, imagine a small community with one neighbor who made (to use the textiles example) high quality socks, and another that made low quality and also beat his children and forced them to make the socks. The first business owner charged about ten percent more for a better product, and he was also much better as a person. The second business would likely fail in that community. Now send these businesses to different areas and offer only price without any other information…and people buy the cheapest choice.

        Add to that disinformation. There’s so much to say about China. I am so glad that we finally have a president who understands this threat. I read two only two of the articles above so far, and one thing that wasn’t mentioned regarding trade with China is their massive subsidies to their own industries and their massive tariffs on imports. This is not a free market by any sense of the word. And anyone who cares about human rights, our security, the environment et al should also be concerned.
        Here is a video re the environment. It has been years since i lived in Asia and visited China but it looks like nothing has changed.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. @Liz

          Thanks for the comment and the video.

          Got a sister in law whose husband is a CEO whose company has a factory in China. It is funny how everything is new, but the pollution is horrid.

          Totalitarian states are almost incapable of dealing with the pollution problem. When the government runs everything, it puts the government in the position of regulating itself. That does not work. We don’t have the moral character required to regulate ourselves.

          Like

          1. Think I mentioned people in the ROK have to wear masks a good portion of the time now due to air pollution coming in from China. It’s a bad situation…bad enough the protocol changed for US military over there to allow them to wear face masks with their uniform.

            Like

          2. Here is a global air quality chart.
            https://waqi.info

            They are indeed very very poor at regulating their environmental safety. And very good at lying about it (see all those articles extolling China for being so “green”). The bankruptcy of the world solar panel market via subsidizing their own substandard industry for starters. Their own population cannot trust their own food. Smuggled in milk powder (baby formula) is big business for black-marketers, ever since their own industry poisoned their babies.

            Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

cookiecrumbstoliveby

Life through the eyes of "cookie"

Rudy u Martinka

What the world needs now in addition to love is wisdom. We are the masters of our own disasters.

Theo-Logis

Supplying the Light of Love

Level_Head

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

The Recovering Legalist

Living a Life of Grace

Write Side of the Road

writing my way through motherhood

Freedom Through Empowerment

Taking ownership of your life brings power to make needed changes. True freedom begins with reliance on God to guide this process and provide what you need.

The Lions Den

"Blending the colorful issues of life with the unapologetic truth of scripture, while adding some gracious ferocity.”

In My Father's House

"...that where I am you may be also." Jn.14:3

Allallt in discussion

Debate and discussion: Reasonable, rational and fair

PUMABydesign001's Blog

“I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: as government expands, liberty contracts.” Ronald Reagan.

TLP

Finding Clear and Simple Faith

Amatopia

Author Alexander Hellene - Sci-Fi - Urban Fantasy - Fantasy - Culture - Art - Entertainment - Music - Fun

John Branyan

something funny is occurring

Because The Bible Wasn't Written In English

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

Fr. Pietraszko's Corner

Discovering Truth and Love

Victory Girls Blog

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

Through Ink & Image

...Pursuing a God Inspired Life

D. Patrick Collins

liberating christian thought

Healthy Mind Ministry

Sharing the Gospel message of hope, strength, love, and peace through Jesus Christ to those who are hurting in their soul or spirit. This is the mission of Healthy Mind Ministry

Conservative Government

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

The Night Wind

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

In Saner Thought

"It is the duty of every man, as far as his ability extends, to detect and expose delusion and error"..Thomas Paine

SGM

Faithful servants never retire. You can retire from your career, but you will never retire from serving God. – Rick Warren

Communio

"Fear Not, Only Believe." Mk. 5:36

All Along the Watchtower

A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you ... John 13:34

The Bull Elephant

Conservative and libertarian news, analysis, and entertainment

Always On Watch: Semper Vigilans

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

The Family Foundation Blog - The Family Foundation

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

Dr. Luis C. Almeida

College Professor

praythroughhistory

Heal the past. Free the present. Bless the future.

Dr. Lloyd Stebbins

Deliberate Joy

Lillie-Put

The place where you can find out what Lillie thinks

He Hath Said

is the source of all wisdom, and the fountain of all comfort; let it dwell in you richly, as a well of living water, springing up unto everlasting life

quotes and notes and opinions

from a Biblical perspective

partneringwitheagles

WHENEVER ANY FORM OF GOVERNMENT BECOMES DESTRUCTIVE OF THESE ENDS (LIFE,LIBERTY,AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS) IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO ALTER OR ABOLISH IT, AND TO INSTITUTE A NEW GOVERNMENT...

nebraskaenergyobserver

The view from the Anglosphere

bluebird of bitterness

The opinions expressed are those of the author. You go get your own opinions.

Pacific Paratrooper

This WordPress.com site is Pacific War era information

Running The Race

Hebrews 12:1

THE RIVER WALK

Daily Thoughts and Meditations as we journey together with our Lord.

atimetoshare.me

My Walk, His Way - daily inspiration

Truth in Palmyra

By Wally Fry

Kingdom Pastor

Living Freely In God's Kingdom

%d bloggers like this: