ChrisWeigant.com

Dianne Feinstein Leads The Way With "Keep Families Together Act"

[ Posted Monday, June 18th, 2018 – 15:56 PDT ]

Senator Dianne Feinstein has introduced a bill in the Senate which would end Donald Trump's cruel policy of separating children from their parents at the border. You might not have heard of this bill, which is in itself a messaging failure of both Feinstein and the rest of the Democrats. Feinstein did not appear on any of the Sunday political shows (at least, that I am aware of), and neither most of the media nor her fellow Democrats who did appear yesterday seem to have been aware of Feinstein's bill. The bill is S.3036, or the "Keep Families Together Act." As of this writing, all the Democrats in the Senate have signed on as cosponsors, but not a single Republican has yet done so.

On Friday, during Trump's impromptu news conference on the front lawn of the White House (which began with a Fox News exclusive interview, naturally), Trump repeated the lie he's been telling frequently: that somehow the Democrats are responsible for his own policy. This is a policy which Attorney General Jeff Sessions used to brag about not so long ago (before all those heartbreaking photos were splashed across the media), but now rather than taking ownership of Trump's own policy, Trump is trying to lay it all at the Democrats' feet. In doing so, he threw down a gauntlet of sorts, saying if Congress did pass a bill specifically banning the child removal policy (Trump's own policy, once again, that he could overturn with one phone call to Sessions), that Trump was ready to sign it on the spot.

Feinstein, to her credit, is taking Trump up on his offer. Her standalone bill only deals with child removal, and not all the rest of the immigration debate. It merely overturns Trump's child removal policy, no more and no less. Some Democrats who did appear yesterday morning also spoke of an effort in the House to put forward a similar bill, specifically targeted at overturning this Draconian policy, so perhaps a companion bill will appear in the House in the next few days. But neither one of these bills is going to move unless people know about them. Democrats have to get the word out, and fast.

Currently, the media is obsessed with the child removal issue. That helps Democrats politically, but it won't last long. Television media have notoriously short attention spans, to put it mildly. Having a bill to talk about will focus the attention where it will do the most good, but this effort must begin immediately.

Republicans in Congress already had a problem, even before the child separation policy began to dominate the storyline. They were already planning on this being "immigration week," at least in the House. Paul Ryan faced a near-revolt over the issue a few weeks back, because there are two mutually exclusive factions within his own caucus. The Tea Partiers want a bare-knuckles immigration reform bill to get a symbolic vote (since nobody expects it to pass). But the more-moderate members of the party are terrified that if they don't try to realistically address the DREAMers/DACA kids problem before the midterms, they are going to lose their seats to a Democrat. Both factions were, in fact, making the same argument to Ryan -- we could lose the midterms over this issue.

A discharge petition was circulated to force Ryan to hold votes on four outstanding bills. Whichever bill got the most votes would pass and be sent to the Senate. One of those bills was a bipartisan solution that would have given Trump more funding for border security, but no money for his beloved wall and no changes to legal immigration. In return, the DACA population would get an eventual path to citizenship. If the discharge petition had gotten 218 signatures, it would have forced these votes.

Alas, even though every Democrat signed it, it still fell two signatures short. Ryan mounted a last-ditch effort to head off the open revolt, and it worked. He announced last Tuesday that the House would hold votes on two bills this week, the hardliners' bill and a "moderate compromise" bill. This convinced the fence-sitting moderate Republicans not to sign the petition, so Ryan averted the crisis. The only problem with this scheme was that this new bill was neither moderate nor a real compromise.

The bill is still somewhat of a moving target, but from all accounts it is very similar to the hardliners' bill. The only substantive difference is that the Tea Party bill would have only given temporary relief to the DREAMers, while the "moderate" bill included a path to citizenship. Other than that, both bills sounded pretty much the same, complete with all "four pillars" Trump has been demanding. These include money for his wall, and two big changes to the legal immigration system. After the child separation issue burst into the spotlight, the "moderate" bill also added language to end Trump's policy, making the second big difference between the bills.

This bill is not moderate -- it has everything Trump is demanding. This bill was not a compromise in any way, because it was only a compromise within the Republican Party. No Democrat was invited to the bargaining table. Democratic input was not sought nor would it have been welcome if offered. Which puts the lie to Trump's most recent whining, that Democrats somehow "refuse to come to the table" -- it's hard to come to that table when Paul Ryan won't even let you in the room, in other words.

Ryan and Trump had a very cynical playbook, it bears mentioning. Because even the "moderate" bill was never going to pass the Senate, and both men knew it. So the plan was to get it passed in the House (likely with only Republican votes, as not many Democrats are going to vote for Trump's wall), and then watch it die in the Senate while conveniently blaming Democrats out on the campaign trail. Trump even scheduled a high-profile meeting with congressional Republicans tomorrow night so they could all get on this cynical political page.

But this was all worked out before the child separation policy became such a whopping big deal. Now, Republicans are busy scrambling to figure out what they should do next. Because playing politics with the DREAMers was the plan, since that currently isn't as urgent as it once was (a federal judge ruled that DACA must continue for the time being). But the child separation problem is not just urgent but is now imminent. The media has focused a glaring spotlight on it, so if Republicans play politics by passing a bill that cannot pass the Senate, that means that the child separation policy will continue throughout the midterm election season. And that's an even bigger problem than the DREAMers would have been. Trying to say: "Hey, we voted on something, but Democrats blocked it in the Senate" might have worked for just the DREAMers, but it is not going to fly for the children being forcibly removed from their parents, who are attempting to claim asylum.

That last bit is key -- these are not economic refugees, these are people fleeing violence and gangs and threats and possible death. They are coming to America because all of these fears are very real, not just because they want a better income.

Donald Trump is already losing the argument with the public on this issue, and it's likely only going to get worse for him as reporters dig out the facts and put them squarely in front of the American people. The images are horrific. Children caged like stray dogs. Terrified youngsters watching their parents hauled away. Rules against comforting a bawling 4-year-old. Evangelical leaders are already calling the policy inhumane -- the first such break with Trump that I can remember (they even stuck by him through all the "Stormy" weather). Catholic leaders are even more forceful in denouncing the policy. Laura Bush (of all people) just wrote an article that compared the detention centers to the internment of the Japanese-Americans during World War II. And more and more Republican politicians are beginning to at least vaguely denounce the policy, because they know full well how bad the optics have gotten for Trump. The media is finally calling Trump out on one of his many lies, as they repeat over and over that Trump's assertion that this is somehow all the Democrats' fault because of a "Democrat law" is just plain false. There is no such law, period. Trump is losing this argument, and he's losing it badly.

The only problem is that so far the media is largely letting Republicans get away with their vague unease because they are somehow not aware of Feinstein's bill. Once it becomes widely known that there is indeed a piece of legislation which would fix this problem for good, then all those Republicans will be asked whether they support it or not. So far, no Senate Republican has signed onto it. Republican Senator Susan Collins was actually asked about the Feinstein bill on one of the political shows yesterday, and while she denounced the Trump policy, she also said she could not support the Feinstein bill, because it was somehow "too wide."

Well, you know what? Maybe Feinstein's bill was hastily written. Maybe it needs a little refinement. This should be easily achieved, since the goal is so plain -- stop Trump from continuing his inhumane policy. There is, after all, a process that bills are supposed to go through. Have the relevant committee or committees propose and vote on specific amendments to the Feinstein bill to make it clearer or better. Then vote it out of committee and intensify the pressure on Mitch McConnell to hold a vote on it. The same process should take place in the House, for a standalone bill that stops Trump's intentional cruelty.

Without such bills, Republicans can get away with their half-hearted condemnation of the Trump child separation policy. With such bills, they will be forced to either stand with Trump as he rips small children from their parents, or stand against the policy with their vote. Which is why Democrats need to mention the Feinstein bill every time they are interviewed, for the foreseeable future. In their opening sentence, Democrats should point out that every single Democrat in the Senate has cosponsored the bill, while zero Republicans have done so. If the media isn't aware of this, then get the word out on your own, in other words. Because having a bill to point to means forcing Republicans to take a stand, one way or another. And the Democrats even have the ultimate goad to get Republicans behind the effort: "President Trump himself directly asked for this bill, and he said he'd sign it in a heartbeat -- so why aren't you willing to pass a bill Trump says he wants?" That's a pretty convincing argument for Republican politicians, these days.

This entire process, once again, is totally unnecessary, since Trump could bring an end to his policy any time he wishes, with one phone call to Sessions. Since he seems like he's never going to do this, Congress should lead the way as a co-equal branch of government. This is, after all, supposed to be their job.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

119 Comments on “Dianne Feinstein Leads The Way With "Keep Families Together Act"”

  1. [1] 
    Paula wrote:

    Waitin' on Republicans...

  2. [2] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    "But neither one of those bills is going to move unless people know about them."

    So people can't sign on and support something if they don't know about it.

    This reminds me of something.....

    ...be patient, I'm sure it will come to me.

  3. [3] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    OK, I'm going to get to some comments tonight, I realize it has been WAY too long. Mea culpa and all of that.

    But first, I wanted to bring attention to the following comment by glenn.

    He spotted this last Friday, kindly pointed me in the right direction, and I have to admit I totally blew it. It wasn't until I saw the Sunday shows and kept waiting for someone to mention DiFi's bill that I realized what was going on.

    But, again, glenn saw it days earlier. His comment got stuck in the filter, for which I also apologize.

    His comment is basically a very short version of the above article, so I had to offer up a big hat tip for beating me to the punch, and point it out in penance.

    OK, I will attack the last week's comments later on, gotta go watch tonight's news...

    -CW

  4. [4] 
    neilm wrote:

    Dr Seuss had something to say about Adolf Trump (note: this is verified by Snopes):

    https://us-east-1.tchyn.io/snopes-production/uploads/2015/11/dr-seuss-adolf-the-wolf.jpg

  5. [5] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    While writing this article is appropriate, considering this for the MIDOTW is not. It is not a profile in courage. It is simply doing what she should be doing which is a pretty low standard to set for impressive.

    It would have qualified for MDDOTW if she had not done anything.

    Certainly not anywhere near as impressive as Lisa McCormick getting 38% of the vote against Menendez that you missed the week before and was mentioned again the same FTP where you found the information for this article.

  6. [6] 
    TheStig wrote:

    8th Amendment. How does this treatment of children not meet the definition of cruel and unusual punishments? Kind of puts a damper on the upcoming 4th.

  7. [7] 
    Paula wrote:

    [4] neilm: Perfect.

  8. [8] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    These detainment centers for children sound an awful lot like the orphanages of the old Soviet Union! Or was it the Nazi’s concentration camps? Oh that’s right, it was BOTH! And what crime has an asylum seeker committed, exactly?

    Allowing young children to panic alone and uncomforted by anyone can cause lasting mental damage in developing minds. Physical contact is needed for a person to be psychologically healthy. I fear seeing video of children with blank, vacant stares rocking back and forth in their cages in the near future. We do not allow our Child Services to treat American children like this, and we should not allow our federal government to mistreat foreign children this way!

  9. [9] 
    neilm wrote:

    “So all the things happening now are of a piece. Committing atrocities at the border, attacking the domestic rule of law, insulting democratic leaders while praising thugs, and breaking up trade agreements are all about ending American exceptionalism, turning our back on the ideals that made us different from other powerful nations.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/18/opinion/immigration-trump-children-american-empire.html

  10. [10] 
    Kick wrote:

    neilm
    4

    Dr Seuss had something to say about Adolf Trump (note: this is verified by Snopes).

    Neil, I love it. :)

    Yes, Dr. Seuss absolutely did. Anyone who doesn't believe this fact needs to read his book Yertle the Turtle. Yertle is a dictator who demands that his subjects pile on the backs of each other so that Yertle can look out over his kingdom... higher and higher still because he wants to reach beyond the moon to see more and more. He incessantly bemoans his lordship over everything he can see and demands more turtles.

    Meanwhile, at the bottom of the pile, the turtles are in pain and hungry and one groans that while Yertle is rising to great heights that they too should have rights. The turtles continue to take the abuse until finally the rebel at the very bottom of the pile getting the majority of the abuse lets out a burp; the entire stack falls, and the dictator becomes "king of the mud"... all he can see... while the turtles become free as all creatures should be.

    Yertle too was indeed Seuss's commentary on Adolph. :)

  11. [11] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    this treatment of children is horrific. next korematsu.

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    Obama’s Immigration Agencies Separated Children From Their Families, Too
    https://lawandcrime.com/immigration/obamas-immigration-agencies-separated-children-from-their-families-too-2/

    Funny how those screaming the loudest now, didn't utter a peep when Obama was breaking up families..

    This proves beyond any doubt that those screaming don't really care about families being broken up..

    They just care about bashing President Trump..

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    These detainment centers for children sound an awful lot like the orphanages of the old Soviet Union!

    And an awful lot like the detainment centers that Obama used..

    Of course, you didn't care about children then....

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's HILARIOUS to hear you people talk about the "poor" children...

    Yet you support the brutal MURDER of hundreds of thousands of children every year..

    Yes, the very definition of hypocrisy..

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    We do not allow our Child Services to treat American children like this, and we should not allow our federal government to mistreat foreign children this way!

    And yet, you didn't say DICK about it when Odumbo was doing it..

    Why is that??

    Because you don't give a rat's ass about the children.. You just want a shiny new bludgeon to hit President Trump over the head with..

    Hypocrite...

  16. [16] 
    neilm wrote:

    The right wing propaganda machine is getting the dittoheads lined up on the same line of lies Michale is spouting above. Basically they have been convinced (because they want to be) that Obama did the same thing as Trump splitting up families, so it isn't fair for Trump to be picked on.

    They really believe this - I'm seeing it in other places.

    Even when you point out two facts to them*, they just brush reality aside and go back to their trained talking points.

    This is the sort of blindness that we have to deal with, without resorting to it ourselves.

    * Two simple facts

    1. This is new, there was not a system of mass separation of families by any other recent President. There may have been isolated cases, but not 2,000 in two weeks, so comparisons are false equivalencies.

    2. This is entirely due to policy changes by Trump and Sessions, and they could stop it instantly today if they wanted to.

  17. [17] 
    neilm wrote:

    And yet, you didn't say DICK about it when Odumbo was doing it..

    Why is that??

    How many times do you need to hear reality - this is a policy change implemented by Trump and Sessions. No other recent President did this. There may have been isolated cases, but not mass, indiscriminate separations.

    But you are really scared. All the right wingers I know are. They have been feverishly running to their propaganda outlets to feel better, and swallowing the kool aid by the gallon because they struggle to look in a mirror and accept that they voted for these types of policy and participated in the "two minutes of hate" against immigrants.

    Now they are seeing the impact on real people rather than a group of "others" they are struggling with their self image as "caring" so are getting particularly insistent that it is in fact them, and their orange liar, that are the victims "Oh poor us, the liberals didn't say anything when Obama did it (he didn't, but don't spoil their story), it isn't fair, we are the real victims" (let's focus on that instead of doing anything for toddlers taken away from both their parents).

    Trump is trying to amp up the trade war (authoritarians like wars, they get to play the "you're either with us or against us" patriotism card and get everybody in line with the help of their emotionally supercharged faithful).

    I expect by next week the news cycle will move on due to either the trade war with China or something else Trump manufactures - but to get the story off of the horrible things he and Sessions are doing to children it will need to be very distracting - this is how authoritarians work. Michale is our canary in the mine - unwittingly he shows us how the right wing is programming the blind believers and what they want them to chant.

    Do not expect these people to change - remember that 2016 was the year they go excited because they had a bigot to vote for and it motivated them. I've lived long enough in America to know there is plenty of bigotry, usually of a more polite form than Trump's, but for every bigot there are five decent people who need to get off their asses and vote in every election.

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    1. This is new, there was not a system of mass separation of families by any other recent President. There may have been isolated cases, but not 2,000 in two weeks, so comparisons are false equivalencies.

    2. This is entirely due to policy changes by Trump and Sessions, and they could stop it instantly today if they wanted to.

    Factually not accurate..

    I have documented MANY reports that prove beyond ANY doubt that these policies were started with the Bush Administration and continued thru the Obama Administration.

    You have documented.. dick...

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    I expect by next week the news cycle will move on

    Now, on this I agree with you.

    The hysterical NeverTrumpers will move on to the next shiny object and totally forget about the "poor children"...

    Which is simply MORE proof that this is nothing but a political agenda...That they couldn't care less about the "poor" children..

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yoooo hoooooo???

    Neil?? Did the FACTS scare you away??? :D

  21. [21] 
    neilm wrote:

    Michale: explain why suddenly there are thousands of kids in newly build internment centers if this has been going on for decades? Why are there 1,000s of separations per month now that didn't happen in the past?

    This is a new policy implemented by Trump and Sessions. It can be reversed by Trump and Sessions in a minute if they want to.

    You being lied to, and are desperate, so want us to believe the lies because you are in severe cognitive dissonance. This is a "grow up" moment - hate hurts people, bigotry fuels hate. Don't fuel your life with hate, it makes your self-image story as being the "good guy" difficult and so you need to double down in victimhood ("everybody else are hypocrites!, it isn't fair to me").

    Victimhood is a sad place to be because it leads to self-pity and self-hate in the end - you can't lie to yourself forever unless you are a psychopath.

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    This is a new policy implemented by Trump and Sessions. It can be reversed by Trump and Sessions in a minute if they want to.

    You keep saying that..

    But you have absolutely NO FACTS to support your claim..

    Whereas I have posted multiple reports that PROVE these policies started with the Bush Administration and/or were in place during Odumbo's administration..

    You being lied to, and are desperate, so want us to believe the lies because you are in severe cognitive dissonance.

    Says the guy who has NO FACTS to support his claims...

    you can't lie to yourself forever unless you are a psychopath.

    Says the guy who thinks President Trump didn't really win the election...

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    Still waiting for any FACTS to support your case, Neil.. :D

    I'll be around.. :D

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    Any facts yet???

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    Aww, com'on Neil!! At least gimme a challenge!!! :D

  26. [26] 
    Michale wrote:

    Gee, yer no fun.....

    Point to Michale....

  27. [27] 
    Paula wrote:

    I've got the traitor-troll blocked again so haven't read what lies he's peddling specifically (and don't care), but he's clearly doing his job as a lie-carrier for the Trumpnazis.

    He isn't worth arguing with - he certainly isn't worth providing proof of anything. He's shown repeatedly he doesn't process information he simply vomits talking points.

    We are in a real fight for the survival of this country as a democracy. The tRumpnazis are fewer, they are stupid, they are cowards, but they are also crybabies and bullies. Step away from them. Let them whine to one-another while we work to save our country. Note who they are and remember what they do, but don't waste energy on them. They feed on the energy - they need it from others because they can't generate it on their own. They are are hollow - vampires - they need to make others angry to fuel themselves.

    Starve them.

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    He isn't worth arguing with - he certainly isn't worth providing proof of anything. He's shown repeatedly he doesn't process information he simply vomits talking points.

    TRANSLATION: NO ONE HAS ANY FACTS TO REFUTE HIS CLAIMS. BETTER TO JUST RUN AWAY AND HIDE!!

    I accept your concession.. :D

    Attacks and threats on my family in 3.... 2.... 1.....

  29. [29] 
    Paula wrote:

    [17] neilm:

    But you are really scared. All the right wingers I know are. They have been feverishly running to their propaganda outlets to feel better, and swallowing the kool aid by the gallon because they struggle to look in a mirror and accept that they voted for these types of policy and participated in the "two minutes of hate" against immigrants.

    They are running out of time and they've long since run out of respect-from-the-rest-of-us. They sowed the wind and will reap the whirlwind.

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    They are running out of time and they've long since run out of respect-from-the-rest-of-us. They sowed the wind and will reap the whirlwind.

    Yep... Just like we did in November of 2016!!! :D

    Look at the bright side, Paula..

    You can still scream at the sky!!! :D

  31. [31] 
    Paula wrote:

    Fun fact: Mark Godwin, of Godwin's Law fame, yesterday tweeted:

    By all means, compare these shitheads to Nazis. Again and again. I'm with you.

    He's a patriot. They are traitors.

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    Fun fact:

    Fun fact:

    Donald J Trump is President Of The United States

    :D

  33. [33] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Is it any wonder why Chris doesn't participate in the comments sections of his own blog?

    This could be a place for people of good will and thoughtful disposition to engage in enlightened discussion on the issues.

    But, a cursory look through the comments sections - any of them - by people of goodwill and thoughtful disposition quickly demonstrates that what passes for enlightened discussion here is little more than name-calling by people who think everything is about them.

    In short, this is no place for people of good will and thoughtful dispositions.

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    In short, this is no place for people of good will and thoughtful dispositions.

    It could be...

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2018/06/15/ftp488/#comment-120233

    Would take some effort, but the reward of getting this forum back to the way it was 8-10 years ago would be well worth the effort...

  35. [35] 
    Paula wrote:

    Meanwhile, that sterling general, Kelly, who was lauded as the adult-in-the-room all those months ago, now says he can't control Blotus. He won't quit - because he's all for the administration's white supremacy actions and wants to ensure they happen unimpeded - but he knows OTHER things are creating problems.

    He has told at least one person close to him that he may as well let the president do what he wants, even if it leads to impeachment — at least this chapter of American history would come to a close.

    Kelly STARTED the process that lead us to concentration camps, and doesn't care about the children. Now he doesn't care about Blotus' fate. Repubs got their tax heist and he got his white supremacist measures. Blotus has served his purpose and is now on borrowed time. Kelly will sit on his hands when the shooting starts and wait for the armed tRumpnazis to be caught and jailed (those still alive). He'll tut tut over the innocent Americans the tRumpnazis hurt or kill, but his shriveled white ass will be safe. If the nazis are defeated he'll sigh heavily and say "it was worth a try."

    https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/6/19/17478448/john-kelly-gives-up-trump-impeachment

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    vox.com??

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    About as credible and reliable as info.wars or breitbart.com... :D

    Once again, absolutely NO FACTS to support anything...

  37. [37] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Would take some effort, but the reward of getting this forum back to the way it was 8-10 years ago would be well worth the effort...

    If you really mean that, Michale, then you must join me in following the rules you set out and not worry about what others decide to do or type out.

    That is the only way this can begin and grow and, eventually - over a great deal of time, if need be - we'll have a comments section that we can be proud of.

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:

    If you really mean that, Michale, then you must join me in following the rules you set out and not worry about what others decide to do or type out.

    Nope.. As I have aptly proven beyond ANY doubt by my several month non-response and my MANY months absence....

    That simple DOES NOT WORK...

    All it does is give the haters and bigots free reign to commit the disgusting and perverted attacks... Hell, even in my ABSENCE personal attacks and name-calling was the standard around here by the likes of Paula and Veronica etc etc...

    The *ONLY* way that we can have our comments section back to the way it was is to have the no name calling rule imposed and enforced..

    It simply won't happen any other way because those who are the most guilty of it will continue it...

  39. [39] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Your absence doesn't prove anything, Michale.

    What we need to do is comment under our rules and ignore those who do not wish to follow the rules.

    It's really not that hard.

  40. [40] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Let's say we and anyone who agrees to follow those rules try it for the rest of the year, starting with Chris's post today.

    I'm in!

    Who will join me?

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    Your absence doesn't prove anything, Michale.

    Sure it did.. I wasn't around and the personal attacks and name-calling was still going on.. Against CRS and Don and anyone else who didn't toe Victoria's or Paula's line..

    What we need to do is comment under our rules and ignore those who do not wish to follow the rules.

    And give those ruled by hatred and bigotry?? That won't get us our comment section back.. It will just give them free reign to make it worse..

    Asking me to do what your asking is like me asking you to quit attacking President Trump.. It's like me telling you, "Liz, just live by your own rules and President Trump will come around and make America the way you think it should be.."

    You KNOW that won't happen..

    And letting the scumbag name-callers have free reign in here won't get us our comment section back..

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:

    Let's say we and anyone who agrees to follow those rules try it for the rest of the year, starting with Chris's post today.

    I'm in!

    Who will join me?

    How about this....

    I will join you in CW's post today...

    But when the personal attacks start (as you just HAVE to know that they will) then you join ME in petitioning CW to have the rule imposed...

    I'll give your way a try and, when it fails, you give my way a try...

    Isn't that fair??

  43. [43] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    It would be fairer if we did it up to this weeks http://FTP...okay?

  44. [44] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    How did I do that!?

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    How did I do that!?

    When you type in FTP in conjunction with a punctuation mark, Wordpress creates a hyperlink...

    FTP and period becomes FTP.

  46. [46] 
    Michale wrote:

    Try that again..

    How did I do that!?

    When you type in FTP in conjunction with a punctuation mark, Wordpress creates a hyperlink...

    FTP and several periods becomes http://FTP....

  47. [47] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I see.

  48. [48] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    If those of us who wish to comment without personal attacks and name-calling through the end of the week, at the very least, then we will see by the time we get to ftp who among us are commenters of good will and thoughtful disposition.

    Deal?

  49. [49] 
    Michale wrote:

    Neil??

    Just curious if you got any of those "FACTS" you claimed you had...

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    If those of us who wish to comment without personal attacks and name-calling through the end of the week, at the very least, then we will see by the time we get to ftp who among us are commenters of good will and thoughtful disposition.

    Deal?

    Hokay, we can try that...

    But if there are threats and attacks on my family, all bets are off...

    We'll see how it goes...

  51. [51] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Fair enough.

  52. [52] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    The policy of prosecuting all those seeking to enter our country, regardless of whether they are asylum seekers, was started in April by Sessions. He’s bragged about it proudly, hoping to win back favor in the bloated man-baby’s eyes. The decision to remove children from their parents was the idea of White House advisor Stephen Miller, who definitely does not look like a giant cartoon penis come to life!

    Entering the country without proper documentation is a federal misdemeanor.

    What purpose does removing the children accomplish? How are we made safer by ripping a crying two year old from its mother? Well, it greatly inflates the costs of detaining these people. We now have entire facilities being created to hold these children instead of just allowing them to remain with their parents as was the past practice.

  53. [53] 
    Michale wrote:

    This is gonna be fun.. :D

  54. [54] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    The original James Bond in the movies used to have this trick when he was being pursued, where he would press a button on his Astin Martin and a stream of oil would shoot out onto the road, which would make his pursuers' car struggle to stay on the road for a moment. It didn't end the pursuit, usually, just gave him a couple of yard's gain at best. I used to think: what a wasteful weapon - a large glob of chewing gum could be far worse, if you think about it.

    But now that I'm grown, and my pursuits are more intellectual, I'm come to see the value of that little Oil Slick. Okay, ready for the metaphor? That's the value to Trump of his lies.

    He knows that the lie "the Democrats started this", for instance, won't stop the Democrats from pointing out the truth eventually. But it's an oil slick - something to slow them down. While they're dealing with that, he can keep moving.

    We can discuss Trump's motivation for instituting the policy in the first place - he believes that this is a way to motivate his base for the midterms, obviously. In his speech today, discussion of the election and his immigration policy was all of a single piece - even though we're used to his meandering and topic-jumping when he's off-script, and he doesn't do nuance very well, but this one doesn't require a sherpa: he believes this is a winning election strategy, and said as much today.

    And worse, all of this human suffering was probably a fallback position, as in, "if the summit doesn't pan out, we'll push the immigration issue for the mid-terms".

    And even if, say, Feinstien's bill garners enough votes to pass both House and Senate, Trump can then go on the campaign trail and claim that he 'fixed' the immigration issue, which can then become the next oil slick that the Democrats have to contend with as they struggle to discuss issues that motivate their base, and not his.

    The point of all this is to 'hide the sausage', the sausage in this case being that awful list of Trump 'accomplishments' that Michale posted earlier. Trump Republicans may think that that's all nifty, but don't really want to defend making air dirtier, water nastier, and Wall street richer. They'd much rather wrestle Democrats in the mud of the immigration debate, where their cocksure belligerence is an advantage, and hope that they can turn out the bigots who (by their calculation) won them the last election.

  55. [55] 
    Michale wrote:

    The policy of prosecuting all those seeking to enter our country, regardless of whether they are asylum seekers, was started in April by Sessions.

    And if we were talking about that policy then you would have a point..

    But we're not, so you don't.. :D

    No moving the goal posts for you.. :D

    The decision to remove children from their parents was the idea of White House advisor Stephen Miller, who definitely does not look like a giant cartoon penis come to life!

    This is factually not accurate and can you please keep your erectile fantasies to yourself.. :D

    Entering the country without proper documentation is a federal misdemeanor.

    IE a CRIME....

    If a man has his children at the Best Buy and he is caught stealing a radio, guess what happens.. His children are taken from him...

    "OH MY GOD, WHAT A FUCKING NIGHTMARE!!"
    -Marisa Tomei, MY COUSIN VINNY

    What purpose does removing the children accomplish?

    The same purpose it serves when any crime is committed in the US..

    We now have entire facilities being created to hold these children instead of just allowing them to remain with their parents as was the past practice.

    Prior to the Bush Administration..

    Separating children from illegal immigrant criminals became the policy during the Bush administration and was expanded under the Obama Administration..

    Consider this, Russ.. A adult coyote and his wife is taking 5 children across the border to sell into sex slavery..

    During the course of their journey, the children are raped by the coyotes... Then they are caught at the border..

    And *YOU* want those kids to STAY with that couple???

    OH MY GODS!!! WON'T YOU THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!

    I dunno.. Seems like the best course of action would be to separate the kids from the adults until the FACTS are ascertained..

    Hmmmm????

  56. [56] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Trump can denuclearize North Korea in one meeting, but he needs the Democrats, who control neither house of Congress, to fix the immigration problem that has resulted in the stripping of kids from their parents???

    Maybe we need to start pleading to Putin to speak out against removing kids from their parents... you know we’d see Trump quickly change his tune then!

  57. [57] 
    Paula wrote:

    [54] Balthasar: that same strategy has been used by the GOP for years now. They start fires everywhere and Dems have to fight them all, one at a time, one after another. Dems have to go ABOVE all this and make it simple: Blotus is Nazi-White Supremacist; GOP is complicit. If you want Democracy you must vote these bastards out and then prosecute their criminal, traitorous asses.

  58. [58] 
    Paula wrote:

    [56] Listen:

    Maybe we need to start pleading to Putin to speak out against removing kids from their parents... you know we’d see Trump quickly change his tune then!

    Putin's objective - faithfully executed by Blotus - is to destroy western democracies. I know you're being facetious, but anyway...

  59. [59] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump can denuclearize North Korea in one meeting, but he needs the Democrats, who control neither house of Congress, to fix the immigration problem that has resulted in the stripping of kids from their parents???

    Obama had a SUPER MAJORITY in Congress for several months and had a LOCK on the entire government for two years..

    And he didn't do squat...

    And Obama did plenty of stripping kids from their parents and put kids in wire cages....

    With all due respect, I ask you..

    Why didn't you say anything then???

    Why, it's ALMOST as if you don't really CARE about the children, that you are just looking to score political points..

    But I know that you are a really nice guy, so THAT can't be it... :D

  60. [60] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michale,

    You might want to refrain from telling me to keep my sexual fantasies to myself for stating that Stephen Miller does NOT look like a human penis and then posting,

    A adult coyote and his wife is taking 5 children across the border to sell into sex slavery..

    During the course of their journey, the children are raped by the coyotes... Then they are caught at the border..

    Sounds like your fantasies are much darker and far more repulsive. And are you suggesting that every child needs to be removed permanently from their families and put up for adoption? Your example sounds just as stupid. Amazing that you can come up with such outrageous and outlandish “what-ifs” but you refuse to even consider Trump is Putin’s puppet.

    You don’t realize that the DOJ has always treated illegal entry into our country as a civil matter unless other charges are warranted, do you? Fox propaganda failed to teach that I am sure. And children under 12 cannot be charged with a crime, yet these children aren’t being taken care of by Child Services — they are being held as criminals by ICE personnel.

  61. [61] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    I did speak out against removing kids from parents for committing misdemeanor level crimes anytime it has been discussed, regardless of who is in charge. Why aren’t you?

  62. [62] 
    Michale wrote:

    You might want to refrain from telling me to keep my sexual fantasies to myself for stating that Stephen Miller does NOT look like a human penis and then posting,

    Aww, come on.. It was funny.. :D

    And are you suggesting that every child needs to be removed permanently from their families and put up for adoption?

    WOW.. How did you get there from back there???

    It's a simple FACT that alleged "families" illegally trying to cross the border are rarely real families...

    The scenario I laid out is factually realistic..

    Now, just answer the question..

    DO YOU advocate leaving children with that coyote couple...

    Yes or no??

    You don’t realize that the DOJ has always treated illegal entry into our country as a civil matter unless other charges are warranted, do you? Fox propaganda failed to teach that I am sure. And children under 12 cannot be charged with a crime, yet these children aren’t being taken care of by Child Services — they are being held as criminals by ICE personnel.

    Which has absolutely NOTHING to do with what we are discussing..

    I told you.. No moving the goal posts for you..

    I did speak out against removing kids from parents for committing misdemeanor level crimes anytime it has been discussed, regardless of who is in charge.

    Facts to support??

  63. [63] 
    Michale wrote:

    I can assure you these places are torturous: policies include banning mothers and children from sleeping together and turning lights on/off every hour to ensure this + guaranteeing sleep deprivation, this aside from your other standard physical/sexual abuse in ICE custody. /7
    https://lawandcrime.com/immigration/obamas-immigration-agencies-separated-children-from-their-families-too-2/

    I am sure I'll see your name there, speaking out about Obama separating families...

    Right???

  64. [64] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again... I call for facts and everyone disappears..

  65. [65] 
    Michale wrote:

    OK, OK... Let's look at the FACTS..

    Democrats’ Border Separation Bill Would Let Nearly All Parents Who Commit Federal Crimes Get Off Scot-Free

    Every Senate Democrat has signed on to cosponsor a bill written so carelessly that it does not distinguish between foreign children at the border and U.S. citizen children.
    http://thefederalist.com/2018/06/19/democrats-border-separation-bill-let-nearly-parents-commit-federal-crimes-get-off-scot-free/

    Go ahead, Democrats and NeverTrumpers..

    PASS this bill.. I double dog dare you!!

  66. [66] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    You are right!! Things ARE better when we concentrate on the issues and forgo the name-calling and personal attacks on fellow commenters!!! :D

  67. [67] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Michale [65]: Gabriel Malor, who wrote that article, is a lawyer and frequent defender of unpopular Republican causes. He's a frequent defender of laws that restrict the freedom of gay americans under the guise of 'religious freedom'. Not exactly a reliable source.

    But even in the text of this latest screed, Malor reveals just how insincere he can be. Take this paragraph, for instance:

    Two groups would not benefit from the prohibition on family separation in this bill. First, parents who have children with a permanent immigration status go unprotected. Additionally, the childless would obviously find no shelter from this legislation. This disparity in treatment for the childless and lawful permanent residents borders on the farcical.

    His pretense of concern for childless immigrants would be almost forgivable had he not added the element of calling it 'farcical', perhaps as a wink to the reader that his own rhetoric isn't meant to be taken seriously. In other words, he's openly bullshitting us, and doesn't care that we know it.

    If Malor had a shop in Sim Republica, it would make only straw man arguments.

    So, no. That doesn't work.

  68. [68] 
    Michale wrote:

    Gabriel Malor, who wrote that article, is a lawyer and frequent defender of unpopular Republican causes.

    For example...???

    He's a frequent defender of laws that restrict the freedom of gay americans under the guise of 'religious freedom'.

    X2???

    So, no. That doesn't work.

    Of course not... :D

  69. [69] 
    Michale wrote:

    His pretense of concern for childless immigrants would be almost forgivable had he not added the element of calling it 'farcical', perhaps as a wink to the reader that his own rhetoric isn't meant to be taken seriously.

    OK, so your pretense for opposing the facts is that you mind read the author's intentions..

    Gotcha.. :D

  70. [70] 
    Paula wrote:

    On twitter: "An associate of Michael Cohen reportedly told @CNN he's willing to cooperate with investigators: "He knows a lot about Trump ... If they want information on Trump, he [Cohen] is willing to give it."

    Flip Mikey, flip!

  71. [71] 
    Michale wrote:

    Flip Mikey, flip!

    Keep dreaming.. :D

    Mueller already exonerated President Trump on the Russian indictment that he is going to have to dismiss...

  72. [72] 
    TheStig wrote:

    EM-40

    I think we should hold making any firm commitments until Our Benevolent Dictator For Life (OBDFL) has had a chance to process and weigh in on the debate. Any treaty that We The Weigantians might devise would not be enforceable except by OBDFL who ultimately controls the great river electrons and accepts annual sacrifices during the Winter Kitten Festival (please give generously). I don't think he would enjoy that task....or take it on.

    I think it is a good thing to have a reasoned discussion on posting etiquette but that is all it can be. We have no means of collective enforcement, and can only offer up serving suggestions.

    The old blog of mystic memory was nicer, but there were fewer people using it, and they posted shorter posts less frequently. More participants generate more ideas making the comments more expansive and more diverse in opinion. There is price to pay for growth in terms of less group cohesion.

  73. [73] 
    Michale wrote:

    I think we should hold making any firm commitments until Our Benevolent Dictator For Life (OBDFL) has had a chance to process and weigh in on the debate. Any treaty that We The Weigantians might devise would not be enforceable except by OBDFL who ultimately controls the great river electrons and accepts annual sacrifices during the Winter Kitten Festival (please give generously). I don't think he would enjoy that task....or take it on.

    While I agree with you in principle, I would suggest that Grand Poobah likes the status of the comments even less.. Not speaking for him, just saying it's a logical assumption..

    I think it is a good thing to have a reasoned discussion on posting etiquette but that is all it can be.

    The problem here is we have seen what your idea of "reasonable" is... And it's part of the problem, not part of the solution..

    The old blog of mystic memory was nicer, but there were fewer people using it,

    That is factually not accurate.. I can name a dozen users that are no longer here, no doubt pushed away by all the hysterics the comment section has developed..

    There is price to pay for growth in terms of less group cohesion.

    Those few of us left who REMEMBER how pleasant things were here are not willing to pay that price...

  74. [74] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    TS,

    Thanks for missing the point.

    I take it you won't be joining us then?

  75. [75] 
    Michale wrote:

    Thanks for missing the point.

    Word.......

  76. [76] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Wait a second ... our benevolent dictator for life?? What the ..., TS!?

  77. [77] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Michale [71]Mueller already exonerated President Trump on the Russian indictment that he is going to have to dismiss...

    Did M.C. Escher design that sentence?

  78. [78] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    What has happened to our wonderful action packed comments section?

    How did it devolve into a discussion of etiquette?

    Thanks a lot Miss Manners! :D

  79. [79] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    neil [9]: Meant to say earlier that I liked that piece, and agree with every bit of it. The Trumpers think that being enemies with everyone except the fascists is a good idea. Well, there are ramifications to that, some of which we saw in the market today after Trump announced his latest round of tariffs.

    It's almost as if Trump has been goading the markets to drop. What's his play, I wonder?

    If Putin is pulling the strings I think his play seems to be to get as many allies of America into a trade war as possible. That evens the playing field, essentially putting them on the same footing that he's on under sanctions. Clever.

  80. [80] 
    TheStig wrote:

    All-

    This website exists because of one person, CW. He does a great job in my humble opinion, and is consistently a step or two steps ahead of corporate media. He sees all the rough and tumble in the posts and sometimes weighs in with a reply, but he doesn't seem to censor people or banish them. It may have happened without fanfare, but in general CW seems to have a fairly literal approach to free speech up to and including rather rude speech. This is very Jeffersonian, who more or less said, if doesn't break my leg, or take my wallet, I'm gonna let it slide. CW self identifies as a Libertarian (left leaning). Libertarians tend to be sticklers for free speech. Free speech is often rough and sometimes ugly. Libertarians believe you have the right to make an ass of yourself.

    Nobody has to read any of the comments, and l use software so as to not have to scroll through useless mean spirited flim flam that some readers predictably generate. I think I would personally favor a word limit. I find I write better when the white space is limited. I think most people do. Most hard copy letters to the editor have word limits, and I think the wrting is better for it. Anyway, this column is CW's baby. That's what I mean by OBDFL...it's a nod of respect....and I stole the title from the Python programing community who bestow in on their guru. (I'm an old guy trying to learn Python).

    Liz, I really do respect your viewpoint, and I do listen when you call me out. Everbody benefits from constructive criticism. Let's have the conversation, but I doubt much will change. Trolls are fact of electronic life and will always be with us. CW seems to live with it. Let's not add his battle fatgue....I don't want him retire because there is nothing out there to replace him. Peace, don't feed the Trolls. This is being written in a cafe, so editing probably pretty awful.

  81. [81] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Stig [80] I'm with you. Keep calm and carry on.

  82. [82] 
    Kick wrote:

    If those of us who wish to comment without personal attacks and name-calling through the end of the week, at the very least, then we will see by the time we get to ftp who among us are commenters of good will and thoughtful disposition.

    Deal?

    Michale agrees at timestamp:
    [Tuesday, June 19th, 2018 at 11:33 PDT]

    So who among us will be the first to break? Any guesses?

    While he's definitely got the victim routine and his lying about other posters and those fake quotes of his down cold, Michale whines incessantly about the name calling and even instigates measures for banning of other posters.

    Meanwhile, on the prior page:

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2018/06/15/ftp488/#comment-120277

    It's business as usual where he's inventing his lies while slinging the regular requisite tired overused name calling of a poster. The timestamps don't lie, and note that he really doesn't mind one iota regarding the name calling as long as he's the one doing it while whining that everyone else needs to cease... Michale lasts less than 30 minutes:
    [Tuesday, June 19th, 2018 at 11:59 PDT]

    Please take note of the board being gaslighted... same as usual. :)

  83. [83] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    TS,

    First off, we define 'rough and tumble' differently. My definition does not include personal attacks or name-calling. It does include aggressive argument on any given issue.

    I'm not talking about free speech, TS. If commenters wish to make asses of themselves, then that is their basic human right. I'm also not talking about censorship or banning.

    I most definitely DO NOT favour a word limit. That would be a bridge too far for me. Besides, commenters are free to edit themselves and shouldn't need a word limit to do so. I do agree with you that word limits force self-editing, leading to better and well-thought out contributions. But, again, I am dead set against word limits. I'm a die hard Biden fan, after all, you know.

    Of course, readers don't have to read comments and can choose to electronically ignore certain commenters. That again, is not my point which is that comments that contain nothing more than personal attacks and name-calling and are devoid of any intelligent discussion on the issues put before us in Chris's columns serve only as a stain on my favourite blog and do a disservice to our gracious host.

    I also agree with you that Chris should not have to deal with the comments situation. This is something that we can choose to do all by ourselves. My hope is that we can work to eliminate, over time, the unnecessary personal attacks and juvenile name-calling and make this a welcome place for people of good will and thoughtful disposition.

    Thanks for explaining about the OBDFL! I know very little about Monty Python and understand even less. I know, I know ... I am definitely missing out! Might have to do something about that. :)

    P.S I'm pretty sure I couldn't have done this with a word limit, at least not without posting in multiple, non-brief comments ... :)

  84. [84] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You just can't give it up, can you, Kick ...

  85. [85] 
    Kick wrote:

    EM

    You just can't give it up, can you, Kick …

    I think you missed the entire point that Michale agreed to stop the name calling on one page while continuing to do it on the other. If he's going to whine like a victim and enlist other posters such as yourself to come to his aid and admonish the entire group on his behalf while he nevertheless continues to carry on with his lies, fake quotes, and name calling as usual, then who is the one who can't give it up, Elizabeth?

    You're allowing yourself to be gaslighted by him and coming to his aid on a regular basis. You regularly admonish other posters at his urging. Meanwhile, he carries on as usual and continues the name calling.

    This pattern has played out so many times on this board that I would have thought you'd figure it out by now... it sure seems like everyone else has. :)

  86. [86] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Kick,

    Why do you comment on CW.com. In other words, what is your purpose here?

  87. [87] 
    Kick wrote:

    Why do you comment on CW.com. In other words, what is your purpose here?

    I have a mother, Elizabeth. I'm not looking for another one. Thank you for asking, though. :)

  88. [88] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Kick,

    My purpose here, for the moment, is to eliminate juvenile comments.

    Your contribution to this effort would mean a great deal.

  89. [89] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    be the change.

  90. [90] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Indeed.

  91. [91] 
    Kick wrote:

    EM
    88

    My purpose here, for the moment, is to eliminate juvenile comments.

    Your contribution to this effort would mean a great deal.

    I realize you believe you're helping. I truly do. However, I am not the one suggesting punishments on one page of this forum while breaking the rules I've promulgated for everyone else on another page of this forum directly thereafter... all while enlisting another poster to come to my aid.

    It's about time that you figured out the dynamics you're enabling when you allow yourself to be gaslighted. Live and learn, Elizabeth... please. :)

  92. [92] 
    Kick wrote:

    JL
    89

    be the change.

    I that your 2 cents? <--- joking :)

  93. [93] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    well, it's the oft-sloganized version of gandhi's “If we could change ourselves, the tendencies in the world would also change. As a man changes his own nature, so does the attitude of the world change towards him. ... We need not wait to see what others do.”

  94. [94] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Very nice, Joshua.

    It's that last bit about not waiting to see what others do that I like the best.

  95. [95] 
    Kick wrote:

    So then I take it that Gandhi wouldn't whine about name calling and take it upon himself to formulate a list of punishments for those doing it whilst simultaneously continuing to do it himself?

    Pretty smart guy, that Gandhi. ;)

    You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty. ~ Gandhi

  96. [96] 
    Kick wrote:

    Paula
    70

    On twitter: "An associate of Michael Cohen reportedly told @CNN he's willing to cooperate with investigators: "He knows a lot about Trump ... If they want information on Trump, he [Cohen] is willing to give it."

    If he's flipping now, he'll be getting new lawyers very soon.

    Flip Mikey, flip!

    He'll either do it now or do it later... They always do. :)

  97. [97] 
    Michale wrote:

    iz, I really do respect your viewpoint, and I do listen when you call me out. Everbody benefits from constructive criticism. Let's have the conversation, but I doubt much will change. Trolls are fact of electronic life and will always be with us. CW seems to live with it. Let's not add his battle fatgue....I don't want him retire because there is nothing out there to replace him. Peace, don't feed the Trolls. This is being written in a cafe, so editing probably pretty awful.

    You may like the status quo but those who have been here the longest remember a more fun time and a more pleasant place...

    Quit speaking for CW.. He is a big boy and can decide on his own..

    You are so desperately scared that things will get better here because that means your kind will be gone..

  98. [98] 
    Michale wrote:

    You just can't give it up, can you, Kick ...

    Victoria is running scared.. She is deathly afraid that this no name calling and no personal attacks thing might actually catch on or, worse, became an enforced rule..

    She's afraid because she knows it will be the end of her time here..

  99. [99] 
    Michale wrote:

    I think you missed the entire point that Michale agreed to stop the name calling on one page while continuing to do it on the other.

    That was a past commentary. The agreement was going forward..

  100. [100] 
    Michale wrote:

    You're allowing yourself to be gaslighted by him and coming to his aid on a regular basis. You regularly admonish other posters at his urging. Meanwhile, he carries on as usual and continues the name calling.

    And you are becoming very desperate that things might actually change around here and those who constantly attack people and name-call commenters will no longer be welcome..

  101. [101] 
    Michale wrote:

    be the change.

    Exactly.. Liz and I are trying..

    As the only other remaining Founder, do you want to join in??

  102. [102] 
    Michale wrote:

    well, it's the oft-sloganized version of gandhi's “If we could change ourselves, the tendencies in the world would also change. As a man changes his own nature, so does the attitude of the world change towards him. ... We need not wait to see what others do.”

    Oh... I thought it was from EVAN ALMIGHTY

    "Be the change..."

    :D

  103. [103] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @michale,

    i already try very hard not to engage in flame wars, but sure, if you'd like it to be a formal commitment i'm game.

    JL

  104. [104] 
    Michale wrote:

    i already try very hard not to engage in flame wars, but sure, if you'd like it to be a formal commitment i'm game.

    Not participating in flaming is all well and good and very important, no doubt..

    But to actually affect (effect??) change in here, one must actively call out those who DO continue to engage in the flaming and personal attacking and name-calling..

    IMNSHPO, *THAT* is the only way that things will in here...

  105. [105] 
    Michale wrote:

    IMNSHPO, *THAT* is the only way that things will in here...

    Grrrrr

    Will CHANGE in here...

  106. [106] 
    Kick wrote:

    You may like the status quo but those who have been here the longest remember a more fun time and a more pleasant place...

    You've bragged several times on this board regarding how you've run other posters off this forum, and now you want to censor people and enlist other posters to lobby the author to have people censored for name calling? No offense, but you complaining about name calling is rather like the proverbial "pot calling the kettle black."

    Quit speaking for CW.. He is a big boy and can decide on his own..

    If you believe TS is "speaking for CW," what exactly is it that you believe you're doing? It seems to me like he simply voiced his opinion of the rules you promulgated for CW's blog. Why is his opinion not any more valid than your own?

    You are so desperately scared that things will get better here because that means your kind will be gone..

    Why is it that you insist on speaking for TS or me or anyone else on this forum and assigning feelings to others? TS doesn't seem the least bit desperate to me, in my honest opinion. TS also isn't afraid of words on a page. When he wishes to avoid the posts he deems trolling or unpleasant [yours], he simply toggles them on and off and asks people very nicely not to feed the trolls. Since he rarely engages in the name calling, I'm not sure why anyone would remotely come to the conclusion that his "kind will be gone."

  107. [107] 
    Kick wrote:

    Victoria is running scared.. She is deathly afraid that this no name calling and no personal attacks thing might actually catch on or, worse, became an enforced rule..

    She's afraid because she knows it will be the end of her time here..

    You've made it quite clear now that you wish to have at least TS and me silenced and/or censored off the boards... but you're wrong again if you believe for one second that I'm "scared" or "deathly afraid" of your lobbying of the author and enlistment of other posters to have people banned from his own website.

    I would wager that you've correctly determined that you can't run me off in the same fashion that you've run off other posters. I will continue to post and support this forum until I am banned by the author. In the meantime, do what you need to do to maintain control of another man's forum.

  108. [108] 
    Michale wrote:

    I wish to have you and TS quit with the name-calling and personal attacks..

    If you can't do that, well... Let the chips fall where they may...

    I can't make it any simpler than that...

  109. [109] 
    Michale wrote:

    I honestly don't see the problem here..

    All you have to do is quit the name-calling and personal attacks on Weigantians and there won't be ANY issues..

    Why do you argue against that??

    "We have the RIGHT....."
    ".. To wage war, captain? To kill millions of innocent people? To destroy life on a planetary scale? Is that the 'right' you are defending??"

    -STAR TREK, Errand Of Mercy

    It's mind-boggling that this should even BE a discussion...

  110. [110] 
    Kick wrote:

    Kick: I think you missed the entire point that Michale agreed to stop the name calling on one page while continuing to do it on the other.

    Michale: That was a past commentary. The agreement was going forward..

    This attempt of yours to have other posters banned while you continue to gleefully hurl insults at those posters you're accusing and attempting to silence is indicative that name calling isn't your issue... while it seems that "control" of the forum actually is.

  111. [111] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again.. This is solely about stopping the name-calling and personal attacks against Weigantians..

    The fact that you have a problem with that is very telling....

  112. [112] 
    Kick wrote:

    I wish to have you and TS quit with the name-calling and personal attacks..

    While you hop over to another page and continue doing exactly that?

    Your actions are indicative that name calling isn't an issue for you since you... in fact... continued to do it. Your issue is obviously control of the forum.

    If you can't do that, well... Let the chips fall where they may...

    Who was it that continued the name calling? In fact, it was you. So as I said, your issue is obviously control.

    I can't make it any simpler than that...

    Like I said, your issue isn't the name calling; it's the control of the forum. Obviously. :)

  113. [113] 
    Michale wrote:

    I am not going to argue with you, Kick...

    If you want to defend your right to name-call and make personal attacks on Weigantians here, that's your choice..

    Just don't expect anyone (who is NOT part of the problem) to support you...

  114. [114] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    111

    Once again.. This is solely about stopping the name-calling and personal attacks against Weigantians..

    Pot-kettle. :)

    The fact that you have a problem with that is very telling....

    The fact that you complained about name calling and promulgated the banning of posters for doing it yet you were the one who continued doing it is also very telling.

    You made rules for everybody else, but you turned right around and were the first to ignore them and hurl your regular often repeated and standard insults. No one else did that except you. Insisting that name calling bothers you and attempting to censor other posters while you continue to do it is Exhibit A. Figure it out, please.

    Meanwhile, have a nice day. :)

  115. [115] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    113

    I am not going to argue with you, Kick...

    If you want to defend your right to name-call and make personal attacks on Weigantians here, that's your choice..

    You say you're not going to argue with me, but then you proceed to put words in my mouth that I never said. My issue wasn't with defending my rights to call anyone names. My issue was with you telling everyone to cease the name calling while you continued to do it yourself. It's not complicated. Reframing what a poster says is your typical modus operandi.

    Just don't expect anyone (who is NOT part of the problem) to support you...

    I believe you have missed my entire point that it was you who made the rules and then continued to hurl your regular and often repeated insults. Your attempt to frame other posters as the problem while it's you who is continuing the behavior is the entire issue. Get a mirror and figure it out, please.

    Moving on to another page now. Over and out. :)

  116. [116] 
    Michale wrote:

    Meanwhile, have a nice day. :)

    Thank you, Kick. I will..

    You do the same.. :D

  117. [117] 
    Paula wrote:

    Kick: Since I'm blocking the troll-traitor I can't comment on whatever bull he's spouting, but just in principle, I'm with you.

    Liz: You want us to all be stuffed into a small room with no windows, while the traitor stuffs himself with beans and then does nothing but fart repeatedly, laugh about it, and expect us to pretend the room doesn't stink.

    If you want to engage in intelligent discourse, why do you repeatedly ask the traitor for his thoughts? He NEVER offers anything except rightwing talking points followed by streams of lies. All you do is hand him plate after plate of beans. But we've had this conversation before - not gonna waste my time.

  118. [118] 
    Michale wrote:

    Those who make personal attacks and name-calling on fellow Weigantians are very afraid that they will be stopped...

  119. [119] 
    Kick wrote:

    Those who make personal attacks and name-calling on fellow Weigantians are very afraid that they will be stopped...

    I don't believe there is a single poster who is the least bit afraid of you, Michale. If you had any real problem with name calling, you wouldn't insist on referring to anyone who disagrees with you as the "Hysterical Left." Your issue is your desire to shove everyone else here into a box of your own making... Your issue is about controlling the board.

    A little self-awareness would do you some good. Once you allow yourself to realize that you really have no control over another man's property, you'll be free to allow others to express themselves without resorting to censorship and playing victim... while continuing to practice the very behavior you're whining about.

    Paula is right; you want authoritarianism and a fawning "citizenry" while you play victim and fart buckets on the entire "country"... very much like your Orange Worship... the issue is control.

Comments for this article are closed.