J.C.MacSwell

I didn't suggest it was. Unless you just crawled out from under a rock I don't believe I need to give you any real examples.

It is hardly irrelevant to responding to an accusation that I'm on the far right. You don't seem to consider yourself a racist at home in San Diego. Are you one when you visit Mexico? How about if you visited Australia? Outside of obvious jokes, my statements reflect my views,. Any questions I ask may not. I'm not questioning anyone here with regard to far right positions. I simply don't recognize anyone here as being that.

If two parties went at each other like the 2 in the US have lately, the third party would have a field day...and rightfully so.

Frankly, I think it is silly considering me on the "far right", regardless of which countries issues we are discussing. Anyone doing so honestly, is so far left that they have taken on some extreme right values IMO, and are unable to recognize a moderate view. I certainly agree with that. Yes. I don't fully agree.

Yes. I'm less certain of the bold, but would agree. I would also agree with the Democrats allowing some concessions to Trump, for the purpose of breaking the stalemate.

I might agree with it as well. Maybe I do "represent" the far right to many here. In Canada I am generally considered a Liberal, but have also vote Conservative and a couple of times NDP. While growing up, all 3 of these parties were considered Left of the US Democratic party.

I don't think it is the obvious solution. I think Trump has somewhat painted himself into a corner, and I don't think the Democrats are very anxious to give him much room. I have nothing against him simply signing off on it. I just don't think it will happen in that manner.

I think a lot of Leftists might agree with that.

Under that definition I have no bias...but I assure you by proper definition I do.

It's both actually. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

...and it would be much easier to see that, if there was less news with such obvious bias.

I essentially asked to what extent it was true with regard to elite work positions, and you did not answer. Unless you think it is of no significance whatsoever (I very well suspect that's the case with you, but am of course not certain), what makes you think I even weigh it more heavily than you do? If you interpret everything I say based on your perception of my views, my gender, or my race, you are being a bigot, sexist or racist. For what it's worth, I would not have directed that question to someone I perceived as an outright sexist, lest they get the wrong idea.

They said description, and characterization of documents, was not accurate. Whatever that means, I'm sure you would agree that coming from the Special Counsel is probably significant.

Apparently this time it was the fake news cycle, but that was actual my thought also. https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/18/politics/mueller-statement-buzzfeed/index.html

Sounds to me like the kind of remark that got Trump elected. And I'm not joking. Nor do I think it is an exaggeration. Try reading just the black. What was actually stated, and stop attributing motives that aren't there.

He, and separately I, may not share your views...that doesn't mean we are doing what you accuse us of. Not even close.

...or he simply doesn't accept polarized thinking, or view everything that way in others.

I would have my own perspective. It could change, though that would not be my expectation. My comments were with regard to addressing those I do not necessarily agree with. For example, in Canada this might be those who feel it is unfair to give so much to immigrants when we have people who are homeless. They would have a point, but I would not think that should override our treatment of immigrants, especially those genuinely seeking asylum. My question on the data with regard to the number of illegal immigrants was not directly related to the above line of thought, which was more about creating a more civil discourse. I was trying to ascertain the numbers. Most of the time 12 million and 22 million seem to be referenced. Instead of civil discourse much of the time, I hear accusations. I'm advocating civil discourse from both sides, and I generally have moderate views. It might not seem it here where I mostly question those who would generally be considered left of centre.

Must be serious. Trump now seeking a summit with KimJong Un...no doubt wants advice on setting up a dictatorship: https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/18/politics/pompeo-kim-yong-chol-north-korea-washington/index.html ...might have had enough of this "checks and balance" thing

We could suggest Ten oz might be "enabling" climate change denialists, but he probably just believes there are better times and places for his efforts. ...but if we find out he's been working for the oil companies...

No. I think they need to be addressed though. I think you and Ten oz seem to be working with a different definition of "addressed" than I am intending. I mean give it consideration and attention. It doesn't mean I will necessarily take on that perspective or support that side. Generally I would expect the opposite if I am addressing something I don't agree with. While usually not, on this particular subject I believe there generally is a double standard...we are weighing in on the rights of citizens and non citizens.

I preferred the one you provided the data. I objected to the earlier one where you essentially said immigration does not bring crime, an overreaching claim. (despite the objection, I think I pointed out that I still agreed with the sentiment of that post) I can be skeptical of some data, such as the estimates of illegal immigrants, but am satisfied with data that tends to indicate they (and legal immigrants) commit less crime than average. Not that I believe it without question, but it seems to be on pretty firm ground. Whether it is true in an absolute sense should not matter. It is enough to say it is not an issue and legal immigration should not be held up for that reason...the effort should be proper documentation and vetting. This would both protect our countries and help maintain current immigration levels long term. It certainly helps in assuaging the concerns of those against immigration...even if they are a minority I think that is important.

Yeah. That would imply I had to be more intelligent, and thus able to assess them in all respects better than they themselves could...

By a thread (chad?) and lost the popular vote. I doubt they would choose to handle it exactly the way they did.

Some may feel they could take their job, or lower their competitiveness, commit crimes, buy up land they wish to own or make it less affordable, put stress on our health care system etc etc. any number of things... Not really. I think we have it pretty good, feel obligated to share it to some extent, and to a good degree we need them. I could become concerned if immigration levels could not be maintained peacefully.