Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.
What is Loopy Pro? — Loopy Pro is a powerful, flexible, and intuitive live looper, sampler, clip launcher and DAW for iPhone and iPad. At its core, it allows you to record and layer sounds in real-time to create complex musical arrangements. But it doesn’t stop there—Loopy Pro offers advanced tools to customize your workflow, build dynamic performance setups, and create a seamless connection between instruments, effects, and external gear.
Use it for live looping, sequencing, arranging, mixing, and much more. Whether you're a live performer, a producer, or just experimenting with sound, Loopy Pro helps you take control of your creative process.
Download on the App StoreLoopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.
Comments
Sounds like there's no real criteria for what qualifies as "racist" except for the whims of those making such accusations. Are you familiar with the video posted online yesterday showing anti-ICE "protestors" using racial epithets at a black ICE officer? I'm not going to post the link since it's a disgusting slur.
The biggest racists are Leftists because the underpinnings of Collectivist thought can only result in the "institutional racism" they claim to oppose. If the entire philosophy is "race-based" then all political positions will reflect this and all policies will be discriminatory. We saw this in every Democratic administration in our modern era.
True.
I wonder how many of those who voted for him are now appauled by the way the deporting is being conducted by ICE thugs?
The numbers are too low, due to illegal interference and threats in the Democrat-run states. Trump should’ve invoked the Insurrection Act months ago (and no, that’s not evidence “fascism”, that’s the constitutionally correct way to handle the violent Marxists and Communists who are engaging in insurrection).
Someone sure loves fish around here. Seems like every post is full of it.
Calling something racist isn’t about “whims.” There are pretty well-established criteria: targeting people based on race, using racial slurs, or supporting policies that unfairly harm a group because of race. That applies no matter who does it. If protesters used a racial slur against a Black ICE officer, that’s racist - full stop. Condemning that doesn’t require defending ICE or opposing immigration reform.
But taking one ugly incident and using it to label “the Left” as the biggest racists doesn’t hold up. Individuals can act racist without that behavior representing an entire political philosophy. By that logic, any racist act by someone on the right would prove conservatism itself is racist - which most people rightly reject.
Collectivism and racism also aren’t the same thing. Many people on the left focus on race because they’re trying to measure and fix unequal outcomes, not because they believe races are inherently different or should be treated as such. You can disagree with that approach, or argue it backfires, without claiming it’s equivalent to racial prejudice.
And saying every Democratic administration was racist ignores reality. Those administrations expanded civil rights, voting access, desegregation, and anti-discrimination laws - often over fierce opposition. You can argue they fell short or made mistakes, but that’s very different from saying their core philosophy is racist.
Saying “the numbers are too low” because of interference is just an assertion, not a fact.
Invoking the Insurrection Act is an extreme step meant for actual armed rebellion that state governments cannot control. Protests, even violent ones, do not automatically qualify as an insurrection, especially when states are already enforcing laws, making arrests, and deploying police or National Guard as needed. Disagreeing with how a state is run does not give the president constitutional license to override it.
Labeling protesters as “Marxists” or “Communists” does not make them insurrectionists. Most are neither, and even those who are still have constitutional rights. Political ideology is not grounds for military action against civilians.
Calling all ICE agents “thugs” is wrong, but so is pretending federal power should be unleashed without restraint. The Constitution is not just about authority. It is also about limits, due process, and civilian control. Using the Insurrection Act to silence political unrest would be a dangerous precedent, not a neutral or routine application of the law.
Strong enforcement and rule of law do not require suspending democratic norms or treating political dissent as treason.
The funny thing about "facism" is that when it benefits their side, it's called "patriotism".
I have repeatedly asked 2 questions.
They are uncomfortable questions that nobody is willing to address.
I think I'll just sit back and observe for awhile.
Why would they be appalled? They voted for that corpulent, shit-scented buffoon.
His supporters are just as vile as him. They may not know much, but they know they love the cruelty.
Those people weren’t “allowed in” because nobody noticed. They came because the US economy has needed their labor for decades. Farms, construction sites, restaurants, cleaning, caregiving and food processing all rely on workers Americans generally do not line up to do, especially for the wages offered. Employers hired them anyway, consumers benefited from lower prices, and politicians from both parties avoided fixing the system because cracking down without changing the economy would have caused shortages and higher costs. That is why enforcement was inconsistent. It was convenient.
Immigration laws were not changed even when there were votes because real reform forces politicians to admit tradeoffs. You cannot have cheap food, cheap housing, fast construction, and zero undocumented workers at the same time. Every serious reform proposal makes someone angry. Business loses workers, voters hear higher prices, activists see enforcement, and politicians lose elections. So nothing changes and everyone blames the other side.
What the US has gained is real and measurable. Undocumented immigrants lower inflation by keeping labor costs down. They pay billions in taxes including Social Security that many will never collect. They keep entire industries running and help offset an aging population that would otherwise shrink the workforce and slow the economy. None of this means the system is good or fair. It means it was tolerated because it benefited the country while leaders refused to be honest about it.
But for me the bottom line needs to be fairness and decency in how laws are now being newly enforced. Not deliberate cruelty. That is at the heart of the moral bankruptcy I see today from the current administration and its supporters.
@Paulieworld wrote:
Why do you care about perfect enforcement of immigration law?
Do you demand it of all other laws?
Why are millions of people every day allowed to drive faster than the speed limit?
Why are millions allowed daily to park illegally?
The cost of perfectly enforcing some laws is not worth the expense—and in the case of immigration law, perfect enforcement would probably end up being detrimental to the economy.
If one decided stronger enforcement was necessary, the current mechanism is not the way if you want a just, humane society.
As discussed before, during Biden’s presidency Democrats in Congress (to the dismay of many voters) proposed an immigration reform bill virtually identical to previous GOP proposals: republicans voted against it. GOP leadership was explicit in saying that they were voting against it (at Trump’s behest) in order to keep it alive as an issue.
Our immigration laws are a mess and and to some degree are a reflection of our inability to deal with longstanding prejudice.
Yeah I don't even interact with them. They live in a completely different reality. It's a complete waste of time.
Agreed.
I would also like to fact check the second claim made by Paulie regarding changing immigration laws.
During Biden's administration, congress was very evenly divided, and in the Senate it takes a "supermajority" to get major reform passed.
Let's not forget that Republicans in Congress abandoned an actual bipartisan bill.
https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/02/06/bleak-future-for-immigration-action-after-u-s-senate-gop-abandons-border-security-deal/
This was also true during Obama's time: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-collapse-of-bipartisan-immigration-reform-a-guide-for-the-perplexed/
Trump himself didn't want a solution that would help Biden with the election because he was campaigning on immigration issues.
From the Washington Post: https://archive.is/Alwi0#selection-661.0-661.139
As for the claim that there were 11-20 million undocumented immigrants entering the nation, that seems to be a dubious claim that incorrectly conflates some data and inflates the numbers:
https://cmsny.org/correcting-record-false-misleading-statements-on-immigration/
According to the site, "10.9 million undocumented immigrants reside in the United States, based on Census Bureau and American Community Service (ACS) data. Other organizations, including the Department of Homeland Security, have produced similar estimates." 40% of these are visa overstays, not people crossing the southern border.
Also:
https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-did-20-million-illegal-immigrants-enter-us-under-joe-biden-11121014
So yeah, I would say this very well debunks most of the talking points being repeated here.
@offbrands : FWIW, I harbor no illusions that the active MAGA will reconsider their positions. I am mostly posting in the hope that someone else might read the posts and reconsider their position. It happens rarely, but those rare occurrences are, imo, worthwhile.
I’ve also learned some things from what others have articulated.
I agree with you as far as changing minds; it's probably not going to happen. But I think it's worth it to counter disinformation if one has the energy, even in a niche forum like this.
@AlexY : well put. Thanks for that posting.
.> @espiegel123 said:
Thank you guys also for correcting the record where you can.
.
and just so we don't forget the price that actual US Citizens are paying, just because they're of the wrong ethnic background:
Gut-wrenching.
Absolutely. No one should have to go through dehumanization like that, citizen or not.
But, you know, when I said I worried for my family going through an ordeal like that just by existing in the wrong place at the wrong time, instead of reflecting on that, I was basically told in so many words that I was being ridiculous for worrying about something that might happen. Yet these are the same people that will use a tragedy like Laken Riley's as a talisman for why we need to get our hate on for undocumented migrants.
All people act in their own self-interest. When the people who hold the levers of power lean very far Left, you get very far Left (Progressive and Marxist) policies.
In 2021, Joe Biden sent the "U.S. Citizenship Act" to Congress, which had the net effect of throwing open the border to 11-13 million illegal aliens. He said it would "keep families together" and address migration causes like violence and climate change (by the way, neither of those are legitimate reasons to allow the mass migration of "undocumented people" from anywhere in the world).
The only "legal" reasons to allow anyone asylum in the US (per the Refugee Act of 1980) are: Persecution due to race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group (e.g., family ties, sexual orientation/gender identity in some cases, or other natural and unchangeable characteristics) or political opinion making them a political target.
Thousands and thousands of people were interviewed as they were crossing the border by reporters and they stated the reason they were coming to the US at the time was for the work and jobs. That's not a legitimate legal reason to grant anyone asylum or permanent entry to the US.
But what was the "real" reason? It was a completely selfish one for those making the decisions. Political power. The Left needed a new base of low-income/poor people who would instantly be hooked on Federal handouts, which would keep Democrats in power and the millions of new people would influence the US Census so they could gain representation in Congress. That's the reason which is today obscured by nonsensical emotional rhetoric by "immigrant rights" groups, far Left politicians and the Left-leaning media.
As for why the immigration laws were not changed while Democrats held all of the cards? They still didn't have the votes.
Per Grok: "Democrats used the reconciliation process (which allows passage with 51 Senate votes for budget-related items) to advance priorities like the American Rescue Plan (2021) and Inflation Reduction Act (2022). However, comprehensive immigration reforms—such as pathways to citizenship for undocumented immigrants or broad asylum changes—were deemed non-budgetary by the Senate parliamentarian."
lol, an act that never passed congress can't have a net effect.
Here's the actual summary of the bill, and the bill itself, without the misrepresentation: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1177
It was a bill to establish a path to citizenship for undocumented people that were here already, such as the so-called DREAMERS who came as children (and many grew up culturally as Americans). The other paths apply to people who qualified for temporary protected status or could show a history of agricultural work (about five years).
What I see you saying here is: "The economy can't function without people being paid below the minimum wage."
So... why do we still have the minimum wage? It should be eliminated and wages should be determined by the value of the work to the employer and the willingness of people to trade their labor for money, as would happen in a true free-market economy.
Supply and demand are immutable forces and every time they try to legislate those forces away, they always make their presence known somehow.
Yeah, it's a shame what the Marxists are doing to bring this upon themselves. Interfering with ICE operations is a Federal crime.
https://nypost.com/2026/01/14/us-news/woman-dragged-from-car-by-ice-in-minnesota-idd-as-lgbt-and-racial-justice-activist/
Holy Mackerel so much fallacious thinking.
-Non sequitur: impressive mental leap to go from someone saying "immigrants affect wages" to act like they said "abolish minimum wage".
and LOL on equating being LGBT and supporting racial justice to being a Marxist. How communist of her to back policies for police-worn body cameras.
Someone seems to think that if you believe in social justice, it is ok to treat them inhumanely.
Apparently.
Kind of interesting that the chose to focus on her only, but there's multiple people testifying to similar treatment, which I also posted.
I'm sure their next reply is going to be just more sophist barf.
You make some good points. I disagree with what you say, but it's a good basis to start a conversation. Your position is on the table. We could probably sit down and have an extremely heated debate. At the end of the day, I might walk away and think... Ok, that's a valid point. I get it. I hope you might feel the same about a few of my opinions. I wish our "leaders" would do the same. As long as we are just yelling, swearing, and name calling, nothing will get done.