Long sleeves or short sleeves?That is the question asked by rebels in African countries such as Sierra Leone before they chop off their prisoners' hands and arms, either at the elbow (short sleeves) or at the wrist (long sleeves).
Meanwhile, the Mexican government has published a list of no-go zones in its own country.
What do those things do but make, by any definition you choose, countries like that — and whatever the race or the color of the skin of their inhabitants — little more than shitholes?
Related: What Kind of Startling Groups Might Tend to Agree with Trump About "Shithole Countries"?In any case, the raison d'être of this post is that in view of the narrative of the leftists — that, unlike us other clueless, heartless, and racist neanderthals, they have the hearts and the compassion to see the virtues of the immigrants as well as the dignity of the countries they belong to — there are a number of essential questions that need answering, questions that they never seem to have paused to consider.
…/… How about the citizens of Haiti, the citizens of El Salvador, and the citizens of various nations in Africa? …/… Indeed, isn't the very fact that so many of these citizens are emigrating to America, or to the West, in the first place a pretty strong sign of what they think, if not in those exact terms, of the regions they were born in? …/…
[There is another, and an even more surprising, group — read the whole thing™]
Again: the narrative is that liberals, unlike conservatives, are all-around compassionate, tolerant, and internationalist-minded, as eager to provide help to immigrants, legal or otherwise, as they are to interact with other nationalities and, say, to bring aid to Third World countries.
So this brings up the following questions:
• If immigration is such a wonderful concept, one indeed that will bring hope and change (sic) to the United States, why would immigration not be just as benevolent to all other countries in the world as well? In other words, what I am getting at is, why doesn't this lead you leftists to support precisely the opposite of keeping all the illegals in America, i.e., sending the immigrants home as a good thing (!) since, somewhere, somehow it will prove to be a boon to those nations, what with the very fact of immigrants moving to those (in this case, to their own) countries can only bring untold riches to said nations?!
• Indeed, if the Dreamers are such paragons of virtue, and if it is so evident that all of them go on to become productive citizens, Valedictorians, heroic soldiers worthy of the Medal of Honor, etc, why not let said jewels, why not encourage said archetypes to, go home in order to make their own countries great again?!
• If foreign nations are not shitholes at all — but even more if… they indeed are so (!) — in other words, whatever the status of the countries, won't they benefit even more than America allegedly does from all these Übermenschen returning home to engage in their diligent work and to improve the lot of all the others?
• Won't a return to their home countries prove to be a boon to said individuals as well, in view of the fact that, apart from being super-menschen, they return home with international experience, not least with English as a first language, and therefore with the capacity to get the juiciest jobs in their communities?!
• To conclude, think of the immigrants (become emigrants) and the countries that they return to (immigrants again): Isn't it manifest that everyone benefits from this?! (Everyone but los Estados Unidos; but they are obviously racist trash profiting, and having always profited, from white privilege; so los Americanos deserve to suffer from the absence of all those wonderful immigrants!)
While we all ponder these questions, let me add as an aside that I read on the web that the Democrat Party can be summed up by what they call (and think of) various people — native-born American citizens are called Deplorables; illegal immigrants are referred to as Dreamers. There you have it in a nutshell…
Related: "Undocumented Worker" — The Left's Preferred Expression for "Illegal Alien" Is False and Misleading
Related: • Leftists fail to mention that what little illegal aliens do pay in taxes is dwarfed by what they cost the taxpayer both directly and indirectly
• Illegal immigration is to immigration what shoplifting is to shopping
• Liberals will bring in a slew of (mostly illegal) immigrants, transform them into wards of the state, and register them to vote, thus diluting the power of the Cable Guy voting bloc
• What Obama and his Democratic allies are attempting to do is to completely remake America into a government-dependent society, and importing millions of low-skilled low-educated aliens is central to that goal
• U.S. History has not been, as Obama implies, 200 years of sustained mass migration—and it certainly hasn’t been 200 years of lawless open borders, which is his actual goal
• No one talks about legal immigrants who are hard working men and women, who wait for the frustratingly slow process that seems to discriminate against those who want to do it by the book
• It So Happens That Every Illegal Alien in America Already Does Have Papers
• "Undocumented Worker" — The Left's Preferred Expression for "Illegal Alien" Is False and Misleading
• No, Liberals, there Is Not a Single "Undocumented Worker" in the United States (or on This Planet)
• Hostility towards mass immigration arises not just from fears of economic “progress”, but from various instructive experiences (such as cultural incompatibility, social disadvantage, imported crime and terrorism, and an uninvited threat to national identity)
• Sarah A. Hoyt on Being American
• Phyllis Schlafly's Rules for Addressing Amnesty
• If the U.S. were to treat Mexican nationals in the same way that Mexico treats Central American nationals, there would be humanitarian outrage
• What Obama doesn’t want is for people to draw the connection between immigration and the spreading of disease because it would be disastrous for his long term plans to change the demographics of this country