That is a shame. This was a cogent and well-argued discussion of where we are now and why. Maybe your friends would do well to read it. Maybe you would.
I did read it. It starts out with a mischaracterization of an app that was developed to organize safe asylum applications. Despite misgivings, I read it all. Believe me I understand critiques of immigration policy under Biden (why would I have clicked otherwise?) but this felt like a regurgitation of what I've heard before. That would have been fine, but I've read those without the vitriol. There are plenty of "cogent and well-argued discussions of where we are now and why" that don't stoop to bending the truth and trying to insult people. Who is this piece for? You I guess. But not progressives who are willing and even eager to engage in substantive and thoughtful dialogues. Which is why I'm disinclined to recommend this to a friend, or anyone really.
You talk as though we weren’t here when this was going on. Of course there was the CBP One app and we all saw it and observed what it was for. We knew about the federal flights coming in full of illegals who got to bypass customs. We knew about the free hotels, cell phones, food, and medical. Who do you think you are with this gaslighting, as if nobody can remember anything over a year ago.
As a center left liberal I always try to keep an open mind. I thought it a good essay, it never actually tipped over into a rant, and it covered all the bases with few words and a little humor. Yes it's by Ann Coulter, so what.
kind of a distinction without a difference if you ask me. Think of it this way: if my husband calls a point I make stupid, what might I extrapolate from the adjective he chose to describe something that I said?
Note: I didn't call your reply to me "stupid." I called it a distinction without a difference. Words matter.
The initial appeal of Commonplace, at least to me, was that it offered conservative viewpoints that were different than those parroted by Fox News, Newsmax, etc., or offered by people other than the classic right wing talking heads. I’m realizing I may have been idealistic and it may shortly become another Fox or NR clone, soon to be spouting whatever is the nonsense de jour of the administration. I guess it’s nice for Ann that she is getting work these days but did Commonplace really have to be the ones to give it to her?
I've yet to read anything in the comments other than a disagreement over the number of actual illegal immigrants, and that argument can go either way depending on source, and which ones you consider illegal. Two acustions of ad homs that don't exist, one accusation so silly she supposedly quit.
What of Ms Coulter's query? What is the Democratic plan for deportation of people that have broken immigration law? I'd say she distilled the ideas of the slightly more than half of the country who support deporting people who have come here illegally. We had an election, we voted, democracy and all that.
What is the difference between a small population willing to commit violence because they didn't get their way and another small population willing to commit violence because they didn't get their way? Democracy is the will of the majority sometimes, in 2020 and 2024.
I have a long memory and I can remember Coulter supporting Romney in the primary. Romney supported the 2023 immigration Trojan Horse deal that Trump derailed.
I'd say the GOP governor of Oklahoma has it right. The deportations are necessary. The chaos is not. Obama was referred to by Latino activists as the Deporter in Chief, and his numbers bear that out. The chaos, however, wasn't a factor back then.
Coulter, a partisan D-List hack if there was one, substitutes rhetoric for facts. Border “encounters” are not the same as immigrants being “let in,” and both Democratic and Republican administrations have enforced immigration law and carried out deportations. Many migrants used legal asylum channels created by Congress, not a secret invitation to break the law. Claiming Democrats want zero enforcement is a strawman that ignores their stated position: prioritize criminals and recent arrivals while addressing long-term residents through legislation. Mass deporting millions would cost hundreds of billions, devastate key industries, and trigger major constitutional due-process battles. Disagreeing over scope and method isn’t open borders—it’s a policy debate Coulter reduces to caricature. Last, their was bi-partisan legislation to address immigration, but Trump nixed it, to keep the flames of the issue burning. F- for Coulter and Trump.
Ann Coulter is irrelevant. I didn't subscribe to see mediocre takes by journalistic has-beens. Please keep the standards higher than this or I'll be unsubscribing.
Thanks for this solid overview of the current problem, but per the comments here, mud-slinging takes away from points being made. And it's not Democratic governors and mayors who want undocumented workers to come to their cities and tax their already overloaded safety nets - it's capitalists. Everything that happens in the US is due to "market forces" and these forces will always prefer an endless stream of cheap, complaint labor to paying US workers a living wage. Thank you again!
Ann Coulter? Kinda speechless on this one. Take a minute and look up the filth she has spewed.
Who's next, David Duke?
Welcome to the "new" right. This must be a sign that as Don's administration continues to crater, Oren has chosen to go all in on the insanity. Being smart is one thing. Having character another.
You are beginning to comprehend the sacred victim, entitled parasite culture that has developed in the West, as opposed to the traditional aristocratic privilege, obligation, honor, divine order culture.
Vacuous. Stick to thoughtful conservatives willing to do a deep dive into the facts. Sure some liberals may “hate” the police, as do a number of conservatives. Argument by as hominem attack is beneath Commonplace.
I'm unlikely to "recommend this to a friend" with guest posts like this.
That is a shame. This was a cogent and well-argued discussion of where we are now and why. Maybe your friends would do well to read it. Maybe you would.
I did read it. It starts out with a mischaracterization of an app that was developed to organize safe asylum applications. Despite misgivings, I read it all. Believe me I understand critiques of immigration policy under Biden (why would I have clicked otherwise?) but this felt like a regurgitation of what I've heard before. That would have been fine, but I've read those without the vitriol. There are plenty of "cogent and well-argued discussions of where we are now and why" that don't stoop to bending the truth and trying to insult people. Who is this piece for? You I guess. But not progressives who are willing and even eager to engage in substantive and thoughtful dialogues. Which is why I'm disinclined to recommend this to a friend, or anyone really.
You talk as though we weren’t here when this was going on. Of course there was the CBP One app and we all saw it and observed what it was for. We knew about the federal flights coming in full of illegals who got to bypass customs. We knew about the free hotels, cell phones, food, and medical. Who do you think you are with this gaslighting, as if nobody can remember anything over a year ago.
It's not just "not for progressives". Any civil, humane conservative with a conscience should reject people who spread the bile Ann Coulter has.
As a center left liberal I always try to keep an open mind. I thought it a good essay, it never actually tipped over into a rant, and it covered all the bases with few words and a little humor. Yes it's by Ann Coulter, so what.
she called someone she disagrees with about ICE's tactics stupid, I don't need that energy. Some people dig it.
I thought she called the point he was making stupid. As in "David Holt, made the amazingly stupid point that....." Did I miss something elsewhere?
kind of a distinction without a difference if you ask me. Think of it this way: if my husband calls a point I make stupid, what might I extrapolate from the adjective he chose to describe something that I said?
Note: I didn't call your reply to me "stupid." I called it a distinction without a difference. Words matter.
My bad. Since we're splitting hairs here: "words matter in civil discourse."
Fun fact: I unsubscribed from Commonplace so I no longer get notifications. This is it! So long it's been good to know ya.
The initial appeal of Commonplace, at least to me, was that it offered conservative viewpoints that were different than those parroted by Fox News, Newsmax, etc., or offered by people other than the classic right wing talking heads. I’m realizing I may have been idealistic and it may shortly become another Fox or NR clone, soon to be spouting whatever is the nonsense de jour of the administration. I guess it’s nice for Ann that she is getting work these days but did Commonplace really have to be the ones to give it to her?
Thank you. Completely agree. It's disappointing.
I've yet to read anything in the comments other than a disagreement over the number of actual illegal immigrants, and that argument can go either way depending on source, and which ones you consider illegal. Two acustions of ad homs that don't exist, one accusation so silly she supposedly quit.
What of Ms Coulter's query? What is the Democratic plan for deportation of people that have broken immigration law? I'd say she distilled the ideas of the slightly more than half of the country who support deporting people who have come here illegally. We had an election, we voted, democracy and all that.
What is the difference between a small population willing to commit violence because they didn't get their way and another small population willing to commit violence because they didn't get their way? Democracy is the will of the majority sometimes, in 2020 and 2024.
I have a long memory and I can remember Coulter supporting Romney in the primary. Romney supported the 2023 immigration Trojan Horse deal that Trump derailed.
I'd say the GOP governor of Oklahoma has it right. The deportations are necessary. The chaos is not. Obama was referred to by Latino activists as the Deporter in Chief, and his numbers bear that out. The chaos, however, wasn't a factor back then.
Coulter, a partisan D-List hack if there was one, substitutes rhetoric for facts. Border “encounters” are not the same as immigrants being “let in,” and both Democratic and Republican administrations have enforced immigration law and carried out deportations. Many migrants used legal asylum channels created by Congress, not a secret invitation to break the law. Claiming Democrats want zero enforcement is a strawman that ignores their stated position: prioritize criminals and recent arrivals while addressing long-term residents through legislation. Mass deporting millions would cost hundreds of billions, devastate key industries, and trigger major constitutional due-process battles. Disagreeing over scope and method isn’t open borders—it’s a policy debate Coulter reduces to caricature. Last, their was bi-partisan legislation to address immigration, but Trump nixed it, to keep the flames of the issue burning. F- for Coulter and Trump.
Ann Coulter is irrelevant. I didn't subscribe to see mediocre takes by journalistic has-beens. Please keep the standards higher than this or I'll be unsubscribing.
Thanks for this solid overview of the current problem, but per the comments here, mud-slinging takes away from points being made. And it's not Democratic governors and mayors who want undocumented workers to come to their cities and tax their already overloaded safety nets - it's capitalists. Everything that happens in the US is due to "market forces" and these forces will always prefer an endless stream of cheap, complaint labor to paying US workers a living wage. Thank you again!
Ann Coulter? Kinda speechless on this one. Take a minute and look up the filth she has spewed.
Who's next, David Duke?
Welcome to the "new" right. This must be a sign that as Don's administration continues to crater, Oren has chosen to go all in on the insanity. Being smart is one thing. Having character another.
Shame on Oren.
Even Bernie Sanders said on a recent Tim Dillon podcast that Biden erred with his Open Borders immigration policy.
Well, this was a choice
You are beginning to comprehend the sacred victim, entitled parasite culture that has developed in the West, as opposed to the traditional aristocratic privilege, obligation, honor, divine order culture.
This "10 million immigrants" has been repeatedly debunked. Don't take my statement as fact; look at Politiifact: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2024/mar/08/franklin-graham/no-10-million-people-have-not-entered-the-us-under/. Playing fast and loose with the truth does not make me want to read beyond the scare headline.
Vacuous. Stick to thoughtful conservatives willing to do a deep dive into the facts. Sure some liberals may “hate” the police, as do a number of conservatives. Argument by as hominem attack is beneath Commonplace.
Ok. Here is a non-polemic, deeply researched conservative argument for ending immigration:
https://www.thewaywardrabbler.com/p/a-new-age-of-wandering-tribes
meh, you get one a day. I'm maxed out on open mindedness. next time.
Why not target the largest areas of illegal immigrants in red states instead of just blue cities?
Remember that George W Bush tried to push real immigration reform but his own party killed his bill…several times. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Immigration_Reform_Act_of_2007?wprov=sfti1