Did they also protest when President Obama was ordering the same detentions?

Granted, Obama earned the nickname "deporter-in-chief" in the immigrant community for a reason. He did not, however, order concentration camps or family separation. That even folks like you that have drank the Kool-Aid can't even defend the current abominations, and instead need to resort to redirection, shows how awful these programs truly are.

OK let's see now. I ask a simple question with some historical meaning, and instead of even one thoughtful answer, it evokes only a standard rhetoric package from some self-appointed Ministry-of-Truth spokesperson.

Samples:

"immigrant community:" Propaganda euphemism. (US has many *immigrants* who are legal and who reject being opportunistically, willfully, misleadingly lumped together with illegal aliens -- the traditional term for those at issue here).

"Concentration camps:" A beloved recent spin phrase meant to stifle real discussion. That 100,000s of people try to enter illegally isn't the problem, of course; only how the US tries to cope with them. (By all means keep encouraging them to come, so you can parade more moral outrage at the inevitable results.)

"Family separation:" Wrong in several ways (many of the children arriving aren't related to adults with them; housing children with general adult lawbreaker population has its own problems, was rejected predating current administration, and would be even more harshly attacked; and once again, people choosing to come to the border knowing this will happen bear no responsibility -- only the terrible US authorities who "separate families;" etc.)

"folks like you:" Presumptuous second-guessing. Commenter actually has no clue of my views, because they don't fall within the limited scope commenter can envision.

Now who exactly "has drank" Kool-Aid here? Once again, evidence (if ever more should be needed) that truthfulness and objectivity aren't among the personal values of today's leftist ideologues.

Yah, you're expecting too much from a small newspaper msg board. Maybe in-person discussions will get the result you're craving here. I'm going to go walk my dog.

Where's the pictures of children in these concentration camps from 2008-2016?

This is horrible. Stop deflecting to nonsensical what aboutisms.

Take a stand - defend it or denounce it.

” I ask a simple question with some historical meaning" Take a stand - defend it or denounce it.

Man up.

About children in cages.

For? Or against?

Simple question .

Curious can't defend these policies, but they need to give off the appearance that they are, so they deflect and redirect. The facts are simple and clear: these folks are legally seeking asylum in the United States, and we're locking them up in concentration camps and separating families in order to dissuade them from doing so. This is undisputed by the administration, so the least you can do if you're being honest is admit it and defend it.

Ministry of truth?

""Concentration camps:" A beloved recent spin phrase "

@(in)curious knows they are concentration camps, doesn't deny it, can't possibly defend concentration camps, just spins it.

Ministry of deflection, spin and misdirection.

Thanks for the protest. Let the immigrants in “concentration camp” go to Palo Alto. Problem solved.

Sophie, not everyone lives their lives like you do, paralyzed with fear at the thought of brown people.

@sophie, why did you say that? ‘not everyone lives their lives like you do, paralyzed with fear at the thought of brown people.’. This is a multicultural community, with people from different countries of origin and people of different colors, including me. We are neighbors, colleagues, friends. No one is paralyzed here.

I said ‘immigrants from “concentration camp” at the border. If you are so welcoming, let them go to your home your neighborhood, isn’t it what you are supporting?

The fact that you keep putting concentration camps in scare quotes makes me doubt you're being genuine, but everyone protesting has no problem with asylum seekers being resettled here.

To review: Sophie makes a small rarher flippant suggestion, mentioning only "immigrants" -- not even the honest more specific term, illegal aliens -- and it brings another accusatory screed, crowded with harsh projections of its author's own creation:

"not everyone lives their lives like you do, paralyzed with fear at the thought of brown people."

That tells any impartial observer all they need to know about the attitudes of commenters like that -- no matter what they say, no matter what their further (inevitable) snide reactions to my words or anyone's.

I heard a recent interview of a wise old writer who stressed the rarely-mentioned-today, but still very considerable, shared values that unite most Americans, even while a relatively small fraction argue and accuse and misrepresent each other. He held out the prospect that the shared values will later prevail and Americans come to realize how much they do still share and hold dear. Yet he didn't address the impeding factor of people who labor cultivate alternate senses of reality, bending all evidence and logic around their prime motive of feeling self-righteous and self-congratulatory. Such that in their universe, anyone with a different viewpoint must "live their lives paralyzed with fear at the thought of brown people." Truly amazing.

Curious, your word salad approach to having a discussion shows how you really don't have any ability to rationally discuss reality or policies. To review: you've been unable to respond with facts to anything, so you puff yourself up, deflect, and redirect. Sad!

" bending all evidence and logic "

Odd. You claim a story of an old wise writer, yet offer no evidence. Not a name. Not a publication. Not a link.

@curious is just bloviating without any facts, logic or substantiation.

We used to agree: racism dies in the sunlight. Trump has proved us wrong by removing his hood and fueling the white nationalist terrorists in our otherwise great nation.

They're just easier to identify in the sunlight. Easier still, just note the lack of facts and substantiation of their claims and lies.

My neighbor just returned from one of her many trips volunteering at the border.
She has done this for more than 10 years.
She told me that the illegals are not only people fleeing from South America.
The people are coming from Asia, India/Pakistan, Africa, and the Middle East.
The news seems to always focus on the young Hispanics, when it is not really the truth.

Web Link

The other people pay traffickers even more money than locals.
She says all are economic migrants.
Cuban, Haitians as well.

This is why Mexico does not want them.

Web Link

It's fascinating to see the stories that folks like "Citizen" will make up in order to push their political agenda. What sort of "volunteering" does your neighbor do at the border? Does she call asylum seekers dehumanizing terms like "illegals" like you do?

What a strange private world people like "Facts" "homesick" and the latest "@" troll ("@Sophie," above) must live in.

Sophie suggests that people in Palo Alto walk the talk; response characterizes Sophie as "paralyzed with fear at the thought of brown people."

Sophie points out the gross absurdity of that, employing quotation marks for the usual obvious reason (she's quoting someone else's phrasing); that elicits stuff about "putting concentration camps in scare quotes" ["scare" quotes??? -- yet more projection of what a jaundiced reader elects to read into Sophie's ordinary phrasing.]

Most recently, "Citizen" reports info from a neighbor who "just returned from one of her many trips volunteering at the border." [Note: not "scare quotes" -- what a phrase!! -- even if someone wants again to interpret them so]

Response to that declarative statement: It must be "made up" (on the basis that "Facts" doesn't like it).

That is the private world we're seeing here, and it's something out of Orwell. All ordinary language and logic and principle twisted around, in the service of a few people's self-righteousness.

An ordinary word, indisputably descriptive ("illegal," short for the classic neutral objective US phrase "illegal alien," meaning people from other countries -- aliens -- residing in the US illegally -- and incidentally, "illegals" also is the term Hispanic populations have long used to describe illegal residents in the US or elsewhere -- "illegalos") becomes characterized as "dehumanizing." I have no idea if "Facts" really interprets it in that bizarre way, or is just throwing out conscious spin rhetoric.

But I do know that this taking for granted that anyone illegally entering the US is somehow automatically justified, noble, worthy of assistance and defense, etc. is sheer hubris. It didn't result from a referendum; the general public has never been asked; some people just started taking law and policy into their own hands, accountable only to their own whims.

Moral narcissism.

Another word salad, avoiding his previous lies and requests to substantiate his claims.

Now he starts attacking other posters - brilliant deflection.

He must be so sad, he has to attack, attack, attack, and it's all because the right will not pass comprehensive immigration reform. Trump had both the house and senate for two years and passed NOTHING.

Sad!

2 years of complete control with zero results (except higher numbers at the border) and all @curious can do is claim: "All ordinary language and logic and principle twisted around, in the service of a few people's self-righteousness."

Oddly, that's a pretty good description of Trump. Along with, obviously:

"Moral narcissism."

I forgot to add: They "tailgate" the thread so they can jump in quickly and disparage every comment not hewing to their Party Line (i.e., from most of the population).

"They "tailgate" the thread..." Says the poster who posted *two* minutes after mine? Projection much?

I'll ask again: how disappointed are you that Trump had complete control for two years and passed zero immigration legislation?

He was handed $25 billion for a border wall, plus money for judges and administration to return folks faster, and couldn't take yes for an answer.

$25 billion plus, with complete control:

"Trump’s best chance for border wall funding at the level he wants came in February 2018, when Republican Senator Mike Rounds teamed up with independent Senator Angus King on compromise immigration legislation.

It included $25 billion over a decade to build a wall along the southern border..."

Bloomberg: Web Link

Curious, you seem to be quite the incurious person. True to my name, however, I've posted facts that you find yourself simply unable to respond to, which is why you deflect, deny, and attack. The best part of this is how each long, vapid post of yours highlights just how poorly thought out your stance is.

"Facts" writes "True to my name, however, I've posted facts that you find yourself simply unable to respond to"

Such as --

"even folks like you that have drank the Kool-Aid"

"It's fascinating to see the stories that folks like "Citizen" will make up in order to push their political agenda."

When I defend another commenter (Sophie) from wild mischaracterizing projections ("paralyzed with fear at the thought of brown people" / "putting concentration camps in scare quotes"), which commenters like "Facts" take no issue with, my writing is characterized as "attack, attack, attack" -- thus proving my "Orwellian" thesis above. Yet none ever answered the simple, dispassionate factual question I asked in the very first comment, before they all started spouting off.

The command of objective information seen here is compelling, persuasive, and eloquent. :-)

@curious: again, no facts

"putting concentration camps in scare quotes"

Perhaps you can define the term "concentration camps" as opposed to "death camps"?


How disappointed are you that Trump had complete control for two years and passed zero immigration legislation?