Sam: BARKbarkBARKbarkBARKbarkBARK

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

Millions came into our country illegally during the Biden Administration. They were either got aways who came undetected or they came in to border entry points and turned themselves in claiming asylum. The immigration laws required that those claiming asylum would be held until their hearings deciding their approval or denial of individual asylum claims. At that point they would be deported if their claim was denied. But the courts ruled that you could only detain these folks for a certain amount of time before their hearing or they had to be released. So the courts along with Biden Executive Orders allowed millions to either break into our country or be released into the country awaiting their asylum hearing.

Congress could have changed this situation but with basically a 50-50 split they did nothing. The Appeals Courts and Supreme Court could have stepped in and stopped what became an invasion as Biden and the democrats encouraged the illegals to flood our southern border, but the Appeals Courts either ruled against those filing lawsuits against the Biden Administration or ruled that they did not have standing. And the Supreme Court did nothing.

So now, with Trump elected to stop the invasion and remove those who came in illegally, he uses the Alien Enemies Act to remove as many gang members, and hardened criminals from our country as quickly and as cheaply as possible. After all, who would say he was not protecting innocent, legal American citizens with this action?

But many activist, district court judges decided they would issue nationwide injunctions against President Trump's actions, that many would say he had the right to take under Article II of our Constitution. And now we have our Supreme Court granting emergency relief in a suit brought by the ACLU to say that President Trump cannot deport any noncitizens in the Northern District of Texas under the Alien Enemies Act until the Supreme Court issues another order. According to Justice Alito, in his dissent, the Supreme Court majority went through numerous contortions in order to reach its decision.

In conclusion millions invaded the country for four years, with everyone knowing the harm that action would do, and how it would change our country forever, and two branches of our government who had the opportunity and I would say duty to stop the Executive Branch from encouraging illegal acts, instead did nothing. But now with a new President who has a mandate to remove all of those who came in illegally beginning with the gang members and criminals, the courts at all levels up to our Supreme Court, are pulling out all of the stops to give constitutional rights to non citizens who broke into the country. Folks continue to show the hypocrisy in examples like Obama deporting hundreds of thousands without due process and not a peep out of these concerned judges and Justices. How many two-tier examples do we have to show from the treatment of the January 6 protesters to President Trump? Where were all these due process warriors when the Jan. 6 protesters were held without bail for two years? Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Coney Barrett, your conscience is calling! And with a good 70 % wanting all of these illegals, criminals or not, removed from the country, we have a small cadre of judges throwing a wrench in the gears to prevent Trump from succeeding in the job 77,000,000 of us elected him to do. God Bless Him!

There is something distasteful about all of this. We are rewarding illegal, corrupt behavior, and we should not be. At most 10% of these millions or less have legitimate asylum claims. Therefore the reasonable thing is for all of them to go back where they came from and enter our country the proper way. We will gladly accept individuals who immigrate here under the system Americans decide is proper, and be happy for them. But to the lawbreakers, we are more than happy that you are gone or will be gone at some point.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

Sam Lowry said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

The TDA illegals now being held in Texas are documented foreign terrorists who infiltrated the country at the direction of an adversarial regime. They were arrested in diligently planned and executed raids recently carried out by Departments of Justice and Homeland Security.

— Stephen Miller (@StephenM) April 19, 2025

---

Miller is a straight up racist and a sociopath. If he weren't getting paid to lie, he would lie just for the fun of it.

---

Where is Miller's due process?

---

Where is he charged with a crime?

---

You convict Miller of being a racist (or worse) based on hearsay (from very questionable sources) and guilt by association, but unwilling to convict Abrego Garcia as an illegal immigrant gang member with court proceedings documentation and his associations.

It looks like you will believe and fight for whatever your feelings/emotions are telling you.

BearFan33 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

The TDA illegals now being held in Texas are documented foreign terrorists who infiltrated the country at the direction of an adversarial regime. They were arrested in diligently planned and executed raids recently carried out by Departments of Justice and Homeland Security.

— Stephen Miller (@StephenM) April 19, 2025

---

Miller is a straight up racist and a sociopath. If he weren't getting paid to lie, he would lie just for the fun of it.

---

Where is Miller's due process?

---

Where is he charged with a crime?

---

You convict Miller of being a racist (or worse) based on hearsay (from very questionable sources) and guilt by association, but unwilling to convict Abrego Garcia as an illegal immigrant gang member with court proceedings documentation and his associations.

It looks like you will believe and fight for whatever your feelings/emotions are telling you.

---

To state the obvious, this is a message board, not a court of law.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

Sam Lowry said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

The TDA illegals now being held in Texas are documented foreign terrorists who infiltrated the country at the direction of an adversarial regime. They were arrested in diligently planned and executed raids recently carried out by Departments of Justice and Homeland Security.

— Stephen Miller (@StephenM) April 19, 2025

---

Miller is a straight up racist and a sociopath. If he weren't getting paid to lie, he would lie just for the fun of it.

---

Where is Miller's due process?

---

Where is he charged with a crime?

---

You convict Miller of being a racist (or worse) based on hearsay (from very questionable sources) and guilt by association, but unwilling to convict Abrego Garcia as an illegal immigrant gang member with court proceedings documentation and his associations.

It looks like you will believe and fight for whatever your feelings/emotions are telling you.

---

To state the obvious, this is a message board, not a court of law.

---

Thanks to activist judges and their enablers there isn't much difference these days.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment. If Americans want to fantasize about a white ethnocracy, I won't stop them. Just don't tread on anyone's fundamental rights.

BearFan33 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

The TDA illegals now being held in Texas are documented foreign terrorists who infiltrated the country at the direction of an adversarial regime. They were arrested in diligently planned and executed raids recently carried out by Departments of Justice and Homeland Security.

— Stephen Miller (@StephenM) April 19, 2025

---

Miller is a straight up racist and a sociopath. If he weren't getting paid to lie, he would lie just for the fun of it.

---

Where is Miller's due process?

---

Where is he charged with a crime?

---

You convict Miller of being a racist (or worse) based on hearsay (from very questionable sources) and guilt by association, but unwilling to convict Abrego Garcia as an illegal immigrant gang member with court proceedings documentation and his associations.

It looks like you will believe and fight for whatever your feelings/emotions are telling you.

---

To state the obvious, this is a message board, not a court of law.

---

Thanks to activist judges and their enablers there isn't much difference these days.

---

No one's going to throw Miller in a gulag based on hearsay. That's the difference between him and the people Trump is targeting with your support.

Sam Lowry said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

The TDA illegals now being held in Texas are documented foreign terrorists who infiltrated the country at the direction of an adversarial regime. They were arrested in diligently planned and executed raids recently carried out by Departments of Justice and Homeland Security.

— Stephen Miller (@StephenM) April 19, 2025

---

Miller is a straight up racist and a sociopath. If he weren't getting paid to lie, he would lie just for the fun of it.

---

Where is Miller's due process?

---

Where is he charged with a crime?

---

You convict Miller of being a racist (or worse) based on hearsay (from very questionable sources) and guilt by association, but unwilling to convict Abrego Garcia as an illegal immigrant gang member with court proceedings documentation and his associations.

It looks like you will believe and fight for whatever your feelings/emotions are telling you.

---

To state the obvious, this is a message board, not a court of law.

---

Thanks to activist judges and their enablers there isn't much difference these days.

---

No one's going to throw Miller in a gulag based on hearsay. That's the difference between him and the people Trump is targeting with your support.

---

I'll introduce you to some democrats

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment.

---

But its not "immoral" to decide who gets to become a member of your national community

Quebec for instance favors native French speakers when picking new immigrants/refugees

[Quebec does favor French-speaking immigrants. According to immigrationpolicy.org, the province has historically selected immigrants with French as their first language, with the percentage...70% over the past decade. This preference is driven by a desire to preserve and strengthen the French language in Quebec, which is the province's sole official language.]

Israel gives priority to Jewish people.

Singapore absolutely favors high-skilled immigrants (English speakers and Chinese language speakers are the two priorities)

Etc


Americans wanting recruit new citizens from roughly the national groups that already settled here (and 165,000 from the rest of the world) is not immoral at all

Its a preference policy

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment.

---

But its not "immoral" to decide who gets to become a member of your national community

Quebec for instance favors native French speakers when picking new immigrants/refugees

Israel gives priority to Jewish people.

Singapore generally favors high-skilled immigrants (English speakers and Chinese language speakers are the two priorities)

Etc


Americans wanting recruit new citizens from roughly the national groups that already settled here (and 165,000 from the rest of the world) is not immoral at all

It's a preference policy

---

But it BECOMES a moral issue when the people who make decisions based on emotions rather than facts start getting upset.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment.

---

But its not "immoral" to decide who gets to become a member of your national community

Quebec for instance favors native French speakers when picking new immigrants/refugees

[Quebec does favor French-speaking immigrants. According to immigrationpolicy.org, the province has historically selected immigrants with French as their first language, with the percentage...70% over the past decade. This preference is driven by a desire to preserve and strengthen the French language in Quebec, which is the province's sole official language.]

Israel gives priority to Jewish people.

Singapore absolutely favors high-skilled immigrants (English speakers and Chinese language speakers are the two priorities)

Etc


Americans wanting recruit new citizens from roughly the national groups that already settled here (and 165,000 from the rest of the world) is not immoral at all

Its a preference policy

---

There are widely varying degrees of preference. Quebec may favor French speakers, but it doesn't commit genocide. And French is a language, not a race.

Trump is closely allied with Christian (i.e. white Christian) nationalists. People like Miller subscribe to racial conspiracy theories and design their policies accordingly. By pandering to racists, fear-mongering about immigrant crime waves, violating the law, and going out of their way to be cruel, the administration has shown a hostility to minorities that's all out of proportion with such technicalities as undocumented status.

Wangchung said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment.

---

But its not "immoral" to decide who gets to become a member of your national community

Quebec for instance favors native French speakers when picking new immigrants/refugees

Israel gives priority to Jewish people.

Singapore generally favors high-skilled immigrants (English speakers and Chinese language speakers are the two priorities)

Etc


Americans wanting recruit new citizens from roughly the national groups that already settled here (and 165,000 from the rest of the world) is not immoral at all

It's a preference policy

---

But it BECOMES a moral issue when the people who make decisions based on emotions rather than facts start getting upset.

---

MAGA in a nutshell.

No Sam, the emotional nut in discussion is you.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment.

---

But its not "immoral" to decide who gets to become a member of your national community

Quebec for instance favors native French speakers when picking new immigrants/refugees

Israel gives priority to Jewish people.

Singapore generally favors high-skilled immigrants (English speakers and Chinese language speakers are the two priorities)

Etc


Americans wanting recruit new citizens from roughly the national groups that already settled here (and 165,000 from the rest of the world) is not immoral at all

It's a preference policy

---

But it BECOMES a moral issue when the people who make decisions based on emotions rather than facts start getting upset.

---

MAGA in a nutshell.

---

Peewee Herman back from the grave! "I know you are but what am I?"

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment.

---

But its not "immoral" to decide who gets to become a member of your national community

Quebec for instance favors native French speakers when picking new immigrants/refugees

Israel gives priority to Jewish people.

Singapore generally favors high-skilled immigrants (English speakers and Chinese language speakers are the two priorities)

Etc


Americans wanting recruit new citizens from roughly the national groups that already settled here (and 165,000 from the rest of the world) is not immoral at all

It's a preference policy

---

But it BECOMES a moral issue when the people who make decisions based on emotions rather than facts start getting upset.

---

MAGA in a nutshell.

---

Peewee Herman back from the grave! "I know you are but what am I?"

---

You certainly have to see it's true with the hardcore MAGA supporters. I've not seen anyone say they are emotionally detached??? Obviously they are very emotional voters, and the sycophants emotional government appointees.

Quote:

---

Trump is closely allied with Christian (i.e. white Christian) nationalists. People like Miller subscribe to racial conspiracy theories and design their policies accordingly. By pandering to racists, fear-mongering about immigrant crime waves, violating the law, and going out of their way to be cruel, the administration has shown a hostility to minorities that's all out of proportion with such technicalities as undocumented status.

Sam, who is fear-mongering about immigrant crime waves? All of their crimes speak for themselves with or without us or Miller mentioning them. The certain thing is none of their crimes should have occurred because none of these individuals should have been allowed into the country. And as to the Trump Administration's hostility towards minorities, last I checked more and more of them agree with his policies all of the time.

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment.

---

But its not "immoral" to decide who gets to become a member of your national community

Quebec for instance favors native French speakers when picking new immigrants/refugees

Israel gives priority to Jewish people.

Singapore generally favors high-skilled immigrants (English speakers and Chinese language speakers are the two priorities)

Etc


Americans wanting recruit new citizens from roughly the national groups that already settled here (and 165,000 from the rest of the world) is not immoral at all

It's a preference policy

---

But it BECOMES a moral issue when the people who make decisions based on emotions rather than facts start getting upset.

---

MAGA in a nutshell.

---

Peewee Herman back from the grave! "I know you are but what am I?"

---

You certainly have to see it's true with the hardcore MAGA supporters. I've not seen anyone say they are emotionally detached??? Obviously they are very emotional voters, and the sycophants emotional government appointees.

---

No, only one side ignores facts for feelings and it's not the side that is pro life, pro-borders, pro-law enforcement and anti-trans cult.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment.

---

But its not "immoral" to decide who gets to become a member of your national community

Quebec for instance favors native French speakers when picking new immigrants/refugees

[Quebec does favor French-speaking immigrants. According to immigrationpolicy.org, the province has historically selected immigrants with French as their first language, with the percentage...70% over the past decade. This preference is driven by a desire to preserve and strengthen the French language in Quebec, which is the province's sole official language.]

Israel gives priority to Jewish people.

Singapore absolutely favors high-skilled immigrants (English speakers and Chinese language speakers are the two priorities)

Etc


Americans wanting recruit new citizens from roughly the national groups that already settled here (and 165,000 from the rest of the world) is not immoral at all

Its a preference policy

---

There are widely varying degrees of preference. Quebec may favor French speakers, but it doesn't commit genocide. And French is a language, not a race.

Trump is closely allied with Christian (i.e. white Christian) nationalists. People like Miller subscribe to racial conspiracy theories and design their policies accordingly. By pandering to racists, fear-mongering about immigrant crime waves, violating the law, and going out of their way to be cruel, the administration has shown a hostility to minorities that's all out of proportion with such technicalities as undocumented status.

---

Wow, just wow. Just as I think you are coming back to earth, you start JR'ing again.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment.

---

But its not "immoral" to decide who gets to become a member of your national community

Quebec for instance favors native French speakers when picking new immigrants/refugees

[Quebec does favor French-speaking immigrants. According to immigrationpolicy.org, the province has historically selected immigrants with French as their first language, with the percentage...70% over the past decade. This preference is driven by a desire to preserve and strengthen the French language in Quebec, which is the province's sole official language.]

Israel gives priority to Jewish people.

Singapore absolutely favors high-skilled immigrants (English speakers and Chinese language speakers are the two priorities)

Etc


Americans wanting recruit new citizens from roughly the national groups that already settled here (and 165,000 from the rest of the world) is not immoral at all

Its a preference policy

---

There are widely varying degrees of preference. Quebec may favor French speakers, but it doesn't commit genocide. And French is a language, not a race..

---

Quebec is selecting based on nationality and compatibility

No different than the USA was doing from 1924 on.

You are hung up on race when most people are only interesting in selection based on nationality….places/countries that have people most likely to integrate, fit in, and have job skills

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment.

---

But its not "immoral" to decide who gets to become a member of your national community

Quebec for instance favors native French speakers when picking new immigrants/refugees

[Quebec does favor French-speaking immigrants. According to immigrationpolicy.org, the province has historically selected immigrants with French as their first language, with the percentage...70% over the past decade. This preference is driven by a desire to preserve and strengthen the French language in Quebec, which is the province's sole official language.]

Israel gives priority to Jewish people.

Singapore absolutely favors high-skilled immigrants (English speakers and Chinese language speakers are the two priorities)

Etc


Americans wanting recruit new citizens from roughly the national groups that already settled here (and 165,000 from the rest of the world) is not immoral at all

Its a preference policy

---

Trump is closely allied with Christian (i.e. white Christian) nationalists. People like Miller subscribe to racial conspiracy theories and design their policies accordingly. By pandering to racists, fear-mongering about immigrant crime waves, violating the law, and going out of their way to be cruel, the administration has shown a hostility to minorities that's all out of proportion with such technicalities as undocumented status.

---

Yikes. This is prime MSNBC hyper-race baiting and pro-illegal immigration material. Are you vying for one of their editorial positions?

Jesse Watters mic drop 🔥🔥🔥

Jesse: “Then he has tattoos on his hand that spell MS13”

Jessica: “That’s not true!”

Jesse: “Yes, it is. Read the symbolism, Jessica! What are you? A gang detective? Cut it out!” 🤣 pic.twitter.com/rlvO4MKDPv

— TONY™ (@TONYxTWO) April 22, 2025

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment.

---

But its not "immoral" to decide who gets to become a member of your national community

Quebec for instance favors native French speakers when picking new immigrants/refugees

[Quebec does favor French-speaking immigrants. According to immigrationpolicy.org, the province has historically selected immigrants with French as their first language, with the percentage...70% over the past decade. This preference is driven by a desire to preserve and strengthen the French language in Quebec, which is the province's sole official language.]

Israel gives priority to Jewish people.

Singapore absolutely favors high-skilled immigrants (English speakers and Chinese language speakers are the two priorities)

Etc


Americans wanting recruit new citizens from roughly the national groups that already settled here (and 165,000 from the rest of the world) is not immoral at all

Its a preference policy

---

There are widely varying degrees of preference. Quebec may favor French speakers, but it doesn't commit genocide. And French is a language, not a race.

Trump is closely allied with Christian (i.e. white Christian) nationalists. People like Miller subscribe to racial conspiracy theories and design their policies accordingly. By pandering to racists, fear-mongering about immigrant crime waves, violating the law, and going out of their way to be cruel, the administration has shown a hostility to minorities that's all out of proportion with such technicalities as undocumented status.

---

Wow, just wow. Just as I think you are coming back to earth, you start JR'ing again.

---

Nah. Y'all have just been lost in Trumpside Down World so long, you've forgotten what conservatism is:

https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/150764

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment.

---

But its not "immoral" to decide who gets to become a member of your national community

Quebec for instance favors native French speakers when picking new immigrants/refugees

[Quebec does favor French-speaking immigrants. According to immigrationpolicy.org, the province has historically selected immigrants with French as their first language, with the percentage...70% over the past decade. This preference is driven by a desire to preserve and strengthen the French language in Quebec, which is the province's sole official language.]

Israel gives priority to Jewish people.

Singapore absolutely favors high-skilled immigrants (English speakers and Chinese language speakers are the two priorities)

Etc


Americans wanting recruit new citizens from roughly the national groups that already settled here (and 165,000 from the rest of the world) is not immoral at all

Its a preference policy

---

There are widely varying degrees of preference. Quebec may favor French speakers, but it doesn't commit genocide. And French is a language, not a race..

---

Quebec is selecting based on nationality and compatibility

No different than the USA was doing from 1924 on.

You are hung up on race when most people are only interesting in selection based on nationality….places/countries that have people most likely to integrate, fit in, and have job skills

---

Not so at all. The 1924 law was openly intended to preserve and promote ethnic homogeneity, which is largely (though not entirely) synonymous with racial homogeneity. Trump's people appear to be interested in the same thing.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment.

---

But its not "immoral" to decide who gets to become a member of your national community

Quebec for instance favors native French speakers when picking new immigrants/refugees

[Quebec does favor French-speaking immigrants. According to immigrationpolicy.org, the province has historically selected immigrants with French as their first language, with the percentage...70% over the past decade. This preference is driven by a desire to preserve and strengthen the French language in Quebec, which is the province's sole official language.]

Israel gives priority to Jewish people.

Singapore absolutely favors high-skilled immigrants (English speakers and Chinese language speakers are the two priorities)

Etc


Americans wanting recruit new citizens from roughly the national groups that already settled here (and 165,000 from the rest of the world) is not immoral at all

Its a preference policy

---

There are widely varying degrees of preference. Quebec may favor French speakers, but it doesn't commit genocide. And French is a language, not a race.

Trump is closely allied with Christian (i.e. white Christian) nationalists. People like Miller subscribe to racial conspiracy theories and design their policies accordingly. By pandering to racists, fear-mongering about immigrant crime waves, violating the law, and going out of their way to be cruel, the administration has shown a hostility to minorities that's all out of proportion with such technicalities as undocumented status.

---

Wow, just wow. Just as I think you are coming back to earth, you start JR'ing again.

---

Nah. Y'all have just been lost in Trumpside Down World so long, you've forgotten what conservatism is:

https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/150764

---

No, you're definitely JR'ing it.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment.

---

But its not "immoral" to decide who gets to become a member of your national community

Quebec for instance favors native French speakers when picking new immigrants/refugees

[Quebec does favor French-speaking immigrants. According to immigrationpolicy.org, the province has historically selected immigrants with French as their first language, with the percentage...70% over the past decade. This preference is driven by a desire to preserve and strengthen the French language in Quebec, which is the province's sole official language.]

Israel gives priority to Jewish people.

Singapore absolutely favors high-skilled immigrants (English speakers and Chinese language speakers are the two priorities)

Etc


Americans wanting recruit new citizens from roughly the national groups that already settled here (and 165,000 from the rest of the world) is not immoral at all

Its a preference policy

---

There are widely varying degrees of preference. Quebec may favor French speakers, but it doesn't commit genocide. And French is a language, not a race..

---

Quebec is selecting based on nationality and compatibility

No different than the USA was doing from 1924 on.

You are hung up on race when most people are only interesting in selection based on nationality….places/countries that have people most likely to integrate, fit in, and have job skills

---

Not so at all. The 1924 law was openly intended to preserve and promote ethnic homogeneity, which is largely (though not entirely) synonymous with racial homogeneity. Trump's people appear to be interested in the same thing.

---

I think we have just about gotten to the bottom of your views

You see any attempt through legitimate democratic means by any people to maintain the ethnic balance of their nation (and only bring in immigrants that are of a similar ethnic or cultural background) as "immoral"

So Israel must be one of the most immoral to you.

And Japan, and South Korea, and really the majority of other counties on earth

"How are you going to feel when a president is elected with whom you DON'T agree?"

Gee, I dunno, David, maybe they'll flood the country with illegal aliens or something: https://t.co/fxPoB0XW0M pic.twitter.com/CsAzFUVmG4

— ib (@Indian_Bronson) April 22, 2025

Just now on The Ingraham Angle,

Arizona Dem Representative Ansari comes on and makes a fool out of herself. "rule of law, due process..." etc while she allowed millions of illegals to come through the Arizona border under Biden

Stephen Miller comes on and lets everyone know that El Salvador considers Garcia a terrorist in his own country and he will stay confined.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment.

---

But its not "immoral" to decide who gets to become a member of your national community

Quebec for instance favors native French speakers when picking new immigrants/refugees

[Quebec does favor French-speaking immigrants. According to immigrationpolicy.org, the province has historically selected immigrants with French as their first language, with the percentage...70% over the past decade. This preference is driven by a desire to preserve and strengthen the French language in Quebec, which is the province's sole official language.]

Israel gives priority to Jewish people.

Singapore absolutely favors high-skilled immigrants (English speakers and Chinese language speakers are the two priorities)

Etc


Americans wanting recruit new citizens from roughly the national groups that already settled here (and 165,000 from the rest of the world) is not immoral at all

Its a preference policy

---

There are widely varying degrees of preference. Quebec may favor French speakers, but it doesn't commit genocide. And French is a language, not a race.

Trump is closely allied with Christian (i.e. white Christian) nationalists. People like Miller subscribe to racial conspiracy theories and design their policies accordingly. By pandering to racists, fear-mongering about immigrant crime waves, violating the law, and going out of their way to be cruel, the administration has shown a hostility to minorities that's all out of proportion with such technicalities as undocumented status.

---

Wow, just wow. Just as I think you are coming back to earth, you start JR'ing again.

---

Nah. Y'all have just been lost in Trumpside Down World so long, you've forgotten what conservatism is:

https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/150764

---

I have known and been conservative my whole life, Sam.

You ain't it.

Hating Trump is just puerile emotion, nothing better. Pretending you stand for any ideal just makes you look dumb as well as bitter.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment.

---

But its not "immoral" to decide who gets to become a member of your national community

Quebec for instance favors native French speakers when picking new immigrants/refugees

[Quebec does favor French-speaking immigrants. According to immigrationpolicy.org, the province has historically selected immigrants with French as their first language, with the percentage...70% over the past decade. This preference is driven by a desire to preserve and strengthen the French language in Quebec, which is the province's sole official language.]

Israel gives priority to Jewish people.

Singapore absolutely favors high-skilled immigrants (English speakers and Chinese language speakers are the two priorities)

Etc


Americans wanting recruit new citizens from roughly the national groups that already settled here (and 165,000 from the rest of the world) is not immoral at all

Its a preference policy

---

There are widely varying degrees of preference. Quebec may favor French speakers, but it doesn't commit genocide. And French is a language, not a race..

---

Quebec is selecting based on nationality and compatibility

No different than the USA was doing from 1924 on.

You are hung up on race when most people are only interesting in selection based on nationality….places/countries that have people most likely to integrate, fit in, and have job skills

---

Not so at all. The 1924 law was openly intended to preserve and promote ethnic homogeneity, which is largely (though not entirely) synonymous with racial homogeneity. Trump's people appear to be interested in the same thing.

---

I think we have just about gotten to the bottom of your views

You see any attempt through legitimate democratic means by any people to maintain the ethnic balance of their nation (and only bring in immigrants that are of a similar ethnic or cultural background) as "immoral"

So Israel must be one of the most immoral to you.

And Japan, and South Korea, and really the majority of other counties on earth

---

I couldn't care less what Japan and South Korea do. Israel isn't immoral for wanting a Jewish state. They're immoral for robbing and killing Palestinians.

Failing some miraculous trend in white birth rates, America's future will not be ethnically pure. That's neither good nor evil in itself. Only our response to it is good or bad. We can accept a multi-ethnic society with the challenges and blessings it will bring, or we can keep turning up the heat until we destroy ourselves.

Assassin said:

---

Just now on The Ingraham Angle,

Arizona Dem Representative Ansari comes on and makes a fool out of herself. "rule of law, due process..." etc while she allowed millions of illegals to come through the Arizona border under Biden

Stephen Miller comes on and lets everyone know that El Salvador considers Garcia a terrorist in his own country and he will stay confined.

---

More lies from Miller. El Salvador is only doing what we hired them to do.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The first reply to my post is almost exactly what I expected, so thanks for getting it out of the way quickly.

I share many of your concerns about the SPLC and have criticized it in the past. Some of what's in their article, which I didn't quote, may be over-hyped or over-interpreted. But there's more than enough substance, and I've seen no one dispute these facts about Miller.

---

1. It needs to be said constantly....the SPLC is a completely dishonest organization

And if you are worried about racism it apparently is a racist organization as well.

[Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a "systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace."

But one of the employees who spoke to CNN alleged the organization suffers from a "pervasive racist culture" and an environment in which a woman is not seen or heard. She also said qualified African-American employees were regularly passed over for promotions including one African-American colleague she describes as brilliant. She added, "My boss only hires white people."]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/us/splc-leadership-crisis/index.html

2. You have not shown us anything more than Miller opposes mass migration of 3rd world peoples into the USA (something the majority of Americans support)

The rest is classic guilt by association type stuff

"Look! Someone with non-approved views...and this person knew Miller!"

And the Left of course never applies that biased standard to itself

---

The article has Miller himself (not just people he's associated with) supporting racial quotas in immigration. He doesn't just want to "enforce the law." He wants to enforce laws that will Make America White Again.

---

I think you mean National quotas...not racial ones

And that was of course American policy for decades....wildly supported by the American voting populace

Quotas on foreign migration based on the population composition of the USA at the time & the pervious places people had already immigrated from.

[The 1924 Immigration Act, also known as the Johnson-Reed Act or National Origins Act, drastically restricted immigration to the United States. It established a quota system

The act set a national quota of 165,000 for immigrants from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. The quota for each country was determined by 2% of the number of people of that nationality who were living in the U.S. in 1890. This effectively favored immigrants from Western and Northern Europe]

England got more immigrant visas than Congo for instance.

---

The article specifically lamented the growth of the Hispanic population. Racial quotas have been supported by the public for most of our history. That doesn't change what they are.

---

Then you are arguing against the immigration policy that most Americans want and desire (not bringing in people radically different from and members of a far different culture than the current American population)

I have seen this for a long time around immigration debates.....people (often on the Left) moralize the immigration debate

Immigration is NOT a moral issue.....its a cultural and economic issue

---

It becomes a moral issue when it leads to illegal policies and immoral treatment.

---

But its not "immoral" to decide who gets to become a member of your national community

Quebec for instance favors native French speakers when picking new immigrants/refugees

[Quebec does favor French-speaking immigrants. According to immigrationpolicy.org, the province has historically selected immigrants with French as their first language, with the percentage...70% over the past decade. This preference is driven by a desire to preserve and strengthen the French language in Quebec, which is the province's sole official language.]

Israel gives priority to Jewish people.

Singapore absolutely favors high-skilled immigrants (English speakers and Chinese language speakers are the two priorities)

Etc


Americans wanting recruit new citizens from roughly the national groups that already settled here (and 165,000 from the rest of the world) is not immoral at all

Its a preference policy

---

There are widely varying degrees of preference. Quebec may favor French speakers, but it doesn't commit genocide. And French is a language, not a race.

Trump is closely allied with Christian (i.e. white Christian) nationalists. People like Miller subscribe to racial conspiracy theories and design their policies accordingly. By pandering to racists, fear-mongering about immigrant crime waves, violating the law, and going out of their way to be cruel, the administration has shown a hostility to minorities that's all out of proportion with such technicalities as undocumented status.

---

Wow, just wow. Just as I think you are coming back to earth, you start JR'ing again.

---

Nah. Y'all have just been lost in Trumpside Down World so long, you've forgotten what conservatism is:

https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/150764

---

I have known and been conservative my whole life, Sam.

You ain't it.

Hating Trump is just puerile emotion, nothing better. Pretending you stand for any ideal just makes you look dumb as well as bitter.

---

You haven't even been conservative this whole thread. Otherwise you'd see the wisdom of these conservative judges and the danger of what the GOP is becoming.

If anyone had lingering doubts, Sam's last 3 posts in this thread prove he's absolutely no Conservative.

You're fooling no one but yourself, Sam.