Why did these kids die?

[lostwanderingsoul]

Absolutely not. I am also concerned about U.S. citizens that died in police custody and children who died or were harmed once CPS/DHS/DCFS took custody. The difference is that Trump did not blame their death on democrats so it is not related to the discussion point here. You want to try to take a crack at the OP, though?

OK Why did these kids die? They were sick.

 

[TheresOnlyNow]

I think that we will have some disagreement.

But you think Trump blaming the democrats is a ploy as old as the institution itself? While that may be true, that does not excuse Trump's choice.

It isn't an excuse. His is a duty to protect and defend our border.
There is no excuse for villifying the man for doing his job as the law allows.
And it should be noted that what Trump is doing to defend the border isn't unique or happening in a bubble. Past presidents including Obama as the latest of those examples did the same. In fact, separating kids from their illegal alien parents isn't a Trump thing. It is a law that pre-existed Trump's presidency. And one that was employed by Obama but was signed into law, as I remember, by Clinton.

What doesn't make any sense whatsoever are those American's who insist our border should be open to anyone who wishes to gain entry.
And as a result, whether those proponents are conscious of this or not, we the American taxpayer will have to work harder to sustain those entrants. And suffer more for their unlawful trespass and illegal alien status when they're here.

For the cost of sustaining the illegals that are already present in America and for a period of the past decade, were those monies available now in one giant account, Trump could build his wall.

Why would any American argue that a particular set of laws are of no importance? When it concerns a people who are foreigners seeking to make a first impression by violating those laws as pertains to entering this country.

Why would illegal aliens be thought to be exempt from being law abiding persons? When proponents claim those illegal aliens are only traveling north to seek a better life. When the discrepancy in that argument arrives most strongly as those illegal aliens seek to begin that life as criminals. Violating our immigration laws and gaining entry unlawfully.

 

[Curious George]

OK Why did these kids die? They were sick.

So it was not the democrats?

 

[Curious George]

It isn't an excuse. His is a duty to protect and defend our border.
There is no excuse for villifying the man for doing his job as the law allows.

Yes we should be critical of bad choices by the President. You are wrong.

And it should be noted that what Trump is doing to defend the border isn't unique or happening in a bubble. Past presidents including Obama as the latest of those examples did the same.

I do not know how you think this relates to what I have said.

In fact, separating kids from their illegal alien parents isn't a Trump thing. It is a law that pre-existed Trump's presidency. And one that was employed by Obama but was signed into law, as I remember, by Clinton.

It is like you move from to a tangent and you have a whole list of talking point about that tangent.

What doesn't make any sense whatsoever are those American's who insist our border should be open to anyone who wishes to gain entry.

And now we are on an entirely different tangent.

And as a result, whether those proponents are conscious of this or not, we the American taxpayer will have to work harder to sustain those entrants. And suffer more for their unlawful trespass and illegal alien status when they're here.

More bullet points?

For the cost of sustaining the illegals that are already present in America and for a period of the past decade, were those monies available now in one giant account, Trump could build his wall.

Okay?

Why would any American argue that a particular set of laws are of no importance?

Are you asking questions when you refused to answer mine?

When it concerns a people who are foreigners seeking to make a first impression by violating those laws as pertains to entering this country.

That isn't even a complete sentence.

Why would illegal aliens be thought to be exempt from being law abiding persons?

This appears to be another question. You know, it was not like my question was greatly philosophical and unanswerable.

When proponents claim those illegal aliens are only traveling north to seek a better life. When the discrepancy in that argument arrives most strongly as those illegal aliens seek to begin that life as criminals. Violating our immigration laws and gaining entry unlawfully.

Lol, SMH.

I think you should read the OP again.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

So it was not the democrats?

It was the flu bug.

 

[TheresOnlyNow]

Yes we should be critical of bad choices by the President. You are wrong.

No. You are wrong defending law breakers.

I do not know how you think this relates to what I have said.

OK

It is like you move from to a tangent and you have a whole list of talking point about that tangent.

You're incapable of adult conversation. You Anti-Trumper people are transparent and lonely. I'm happy to end your fun here.

 

[Curious George]

It was the flu bug.

But it wasn't the democrats?

 

[Curious George]

No. You are wrong defending law breakers.

OK

You're incapable of adult conversation. You Anti-Trumper people are transparent and lonely. I'm happy to end your fun here.

Lol. The adult conversation is whether or not Trump was correct in his assertion that the democrats are to blame for the death of these children, whether this assertion was tactful, and whether this assertion does anything to prevent future tragedy.

You are the one who wants to avoid the issue of how Trump dealt with this issue and, instead, regurgitate talking points on 'immigrants scary.'

I don't mind if you want to do so. On the contrary, if people want to take this thread that direction, go for it. However when you reply directly to the OP then i get a notification. I come here and see that you failed to actually respond in any meaningful way and get butt-hurt when I respond in kind. If you are going to reply to me, the least you can do is offer a sentence of relevance. That is how an adult conversation works. You listen and respond. If you do not understand something, feel free to ask. I will be happy to offer clarification.

 

[Shad]

While I appreciate that answer, I am not so sure that I agree with decision to lay blame solely at the parents feet.

Who else is at fault in your view?

 

[Curious George]

Who else is at fault in your view?

I think that if an enforcement agency chooses to take custody of a person they become, in part, largely responsible fot that person. This would entail policies that ensure the safety and well being the person. I am not sure that necessary policies are in place or, if they are, that those policies were followed.

Consequently, I am not so quick to relieve the enforcement agencies of their responsibility in these matters.

That such is the case, is the responsibility of the people in power. Specifically, the voters. While I understand that unforeseeable tragedies happen, death while in government custody due to lack of quick, sufficient, and efficient medical care is not one of those unforeseeable tragedies. While rare, this is not an isolated occurrence. People have continually perished while in government custody. I think the sometimes, momentary outrage resolves back into general apathy as time passes. Quite simply, we, by that I mean U.S. citizens, are likely to blame.

 

[james dixon]

Who else is at fault in your view?

The (ICE) that has tents along the boarder to house immigrants is a private military group hired by "trump"; i.e. the President of the USA to manage incoming immigrants. The members of this group are military flunkies who were hired to do their employees bidding. Trump hates these "immigrants" & so do hired members of ICE. A child's death is just one less to feed.

 

[Shad]

The (ICE) that has tents along the boarder to house immigrants is a private military group hired by "trump"; i.e. the President of the USA to manage incoming immigrants. The members of this group are military flunkies who were hired to do their employees bidding. Trump hates these "immigrants" & so do hired members of ICE. A child's death is just one less to feed.

The two children were not part of that "camp".

 

[Shad]

I think that if an enforcement agency chooses to take custody of a person they become, in part, largely responsible fot that person. This would entail policies that ensure the safety and well being the person. I am not sure that necessary policies are in place or, if they are, that those policies were followed.

Consequently, I am not so quick to relieve the enforcement agencies of their responsibility in these matters.

So speculation backed by assumption to blame people based on something you do not know nor can pinpoint. Gotcha

That such is the case, is the responsibility of the people in power. Specifically, the voters.

Dems voter, sure.

While I understand that unforeseeable tragedies happen, death while in government custody due to lack of quick, sufficient, and efficient medical care is not one of those unforeseeable tragedies. While rare, this is not an isolated occurrence. People have continually perished while in government custody. I think the sometimes, momentary outrage resolves back into general apathy as time passes. Quite simply, we, by that I mean U.S. citizens, are likely to blame.

More speculation. Gotcha.

 

[Curious George]

So speculation backed by assumption to blame people based on something you do not know nor can pinpoint. Gotcha



Dems voter, sure.




More speculation. Gotcha.

You think it is misplaced? Why?

 

[TheresOnlyNow]

Lol. The adult conversation is whether or not Trump was correct in his assertion that the democrats are to blame for the death of these children, whether this assertion was tactful, and whether this assertion does anything to prevent future tragedy.

You are the one who wants to avoid the issue of how Trump dealt with this issue and, instead, regurgitate talking points on 'immigrants scary.'

I don't mind if you want to do so. On the contrary, if people want to take this thread that direction, go for it. However when you reply directly to the OP then i get a notification. I come here and see that you failed to actually respond in any meaningful way and get butt-hurt when I respond in kind. If you are going to reply to me, the least you can do is offer a sentence of relevance. That is how an adult conversation works. You listen and respond. If you do not understand something, feel free to ask. I will be happy to offer clarification.

You lost your argument the moment you accused, butt-hurt, in your retort. However, you did sustain my prior observation of your method as pertains to a deficit in the ability to comport yourself in a manner befitting adult conversation.

 

[Curious George]

You lost your argument the moment you accused, butt-hurt, in your retort. However, you did sustain my prior observation of your method as pertains to a deficit in the ability to comport yourself in a manner befitting adult conversation.

Cheers

 

[Shad]

You think it is misplaced? Why?

As you are speculating regarding other factors not presenting evidence of those factors.

 

[Curious George]

As you are speculating regarding other factors not presenting evidence of those factors.

First, that is not a very good indicator of whether the speculation is misplaced.
Second why would I present evidence of those factors here? This topic is tangential to my point, which is more along the lines of instead of approaching these deaths in a reasonable manner and trying to address problems, Trump has tried to assert that it is the democrats who are at fault.

What I offered was certainly reasonable speculation. What exactly do you doubt?

 

[Shad]

First, that is not a very good indicator of whether the speculation is misplaced.

It is misplaced as you have zero evidence and your political motives are well known to me.

Second why would I present evidence of those factors here?

Credibility perhaps? Nahh...

This topic is tangential to my point, which is more along the lines of instead of approaching these deaths in a reasonable manner and trying to address problems, Trump has tried to assert that it is the democrats who are at fault.

By speculating. Hilarious problem you have here.

What I offered was certainly reasonable speculation. What exactly do you doubt?

That it is reasonable for one rather than your misguided principles.

 

[Curious George]

It is misplaced as you have zero evidence and your political motives are well known to me.

That sounds like a non sequitur in the making.

Credibility perhaps? Nahh...

No need. Either you are aware of the deaths that have occurred in government custody or you are not. Res ipsa loquitur.

By speculating. Hilarious problem you have here.

I answered a question asked of me. That is not really a problem. You have no way of proving that my speculation is incorrect, so it feels nicer for you to toss my whole argument away as speculation.

That it is reasonable for one rather than your misguided principles.

Well I am curious. What do you think are my "misguided principles?"

My speculation was reasonable for all.