Trump to Announce Temporary Shutdown End

[Gulo Blue]

it has nothing to do with conflating one issue with the other. I has everything to do with calling out bullshit.

'Conflate' might be the wrong word if you want to be nitpicky, but the use of 'denial' in this context has everything to do with asserting correctness and the absurdity of disagreement.


...and the word carries that connotation primarily from the phrase "Holocaust denial" and is leaned on in the usage of "climate change denial".

 

[Spartanmack]

'Conflate' might be the wrong word if you want to be nitpicky, but the use of 'denial' in this context has everything to do with asserting correctness and the absurdity of disagreement.


...and the word carries that connotation primarily from the phrase "Holocaust denial" and is leaned on in the usage of "climate change denial".

No, it has to do with the absurdity of the means by which you or MC disagree - like the fact that some (a demonstrable minority) illegal immigrants aren't border crossers, or the fact that a wall isn't practical for parts of the border, or denying facts about illegal immigration and crime somehow means we shouldn't build walls anywhere as part of a comprehensive border strategy.

so I'm no longer supposed to use the term denial because to you it conflates what I'm saying with holocaust denial? That makes a lot of sense. Do you want DSF to be a safe space where hateful language like "denial" isn't used by the bad people on the right? Go grab your thesaurus and make a list of all the synonyms of denial that might trigger you.

 

[Gulo Blue]

No, it has to do with the absurdity of the means by which you or MC disagree - like the fact that some (a demonstrable minority) illegal immigrants aren't border crossers, or the fact that a wall isn't practical for parts of the border, or denying facts about illegal immigration and crime somehow means we shouldn't build walls anywhere as part of a comprehensive border strategy.

so I'm no longer supposed to use the term denial because to you it conflates what I'm saying with holocaust denial? That makes a lot of sense.

Here comes the baggage from wherever else you hear arguments from.


I highlighted the rhetorical impact of your word selection. No need to read so much into it.

 

[Gulo Blue]

For what it's worth (and I think most people would agree with me), politics aside, I am not for or against walls in any fundamental way. To know if a place that doesn't have a wall needs a wall, I would have to know how many and what kinds of people are crossing, who owns that land, what the cost of building a wall there would be, what other options might be available and what those would cost, what the costs of manning that section of wall would be compared to what costs might be currently spent in that area, what the environmental impact would be expected to be, and how easily the border crossing traffic would just be relocated somewhere else if that section of wall was built. And all those things would vary from spot to spot.


None of us know all of that with enough depth to know if $1 B or $5 B or $20 B is the amount of wall that aligns with our personal beliefs about how hard we work to prevent border crossing.


This argument is about whether or not Trump gets to deliver on a part of his campaign promise. If he was serious about it, he should have acted before the Democrats took the House. If the Dems hated walls, they would have fought more against them in the past. This is all political theater.

 

[Spartanmack]

Here comes the baggage from wherever else you hear arguments from.


I highlighted the rhetorical impact of your word selection. No need to read so much into it.

yeah, it usually comes just after you deny (oops, there's that word again) saying something you said.


I'm not reading anything into it. You can find multiple posts from multiple posters in multiple threads that make those arguments against the wall. I would agree though, those arguments are all based on rhetoric and not actual facts.

 

[Spartanmack]

For what it's worth (and I think most people would agree with me), politics aside, I am not for or against walls in any fundamental way. To know if a place that doesn't have a wall needs a wall, I would have to know how many and what kinds of people are crossing, who owns that land, what the cost of building a wall there would be, what other options might be available and what those would cost, what the costs of manning that section of wall would be compared to what costs might be currently spent in that area, what the environmental impact would be expected to be, and how easily the border crossing traffic would just be relocated somewhere else if that section of wall was built. And all those things would vary from spot to spot.


None of us know all of that with enough depth to know if $1 B or $5 B or $20 B is the amount of wall that aligns with our personal beliefs about how hard we work to prevent border crossing.


This argument is about whether or not Trump gets to deliver on a part of his campaign promise. If he was serious about it, he should have acted before the Democrats took the House. If the Dems hated walls, they would have fought more against them in the past. This is all political theater.

speaking of baggage from arguments you heard elsewhere.

It's weird that we didn't have this same thread with these same needs for facts when everyone in congress on both sides supported more funding for more wall than what is currently being proposed when it was someone else's idea.

 

[Gulo Blue]

speaking of baggage from arguments you heard elsewhere.

It's weird that we didn't have this same thread with these same needs for facts when everyone in congress on both sides supported more funding for more wall than what is currently being proposed when it was someone else's idea.

After you mentioned the "absurdity of the means by which disagree", I thought it might be nice to specify some things I don't actually disagree with. Clear things up so nobody has to guess. I wasn't trying to argue against any baggage I heard from anyone else; I thought we might all agree on a couple points.