S hole

A few year ago, trump got in trouble for referring to some countries as "S Holes", this was roundly condemned and Trump was pilloried for weeks by the left for being insensitive.

This raises the question.  If your city literally has a problem with sidewalks with significant amounts of literal human excrement, and is concerned about diseases like Typhoid, isn't there a point where it might be appropriate to label those cities as "s holes"?   Or more accurately liberal run "s holes"?

I guess I'm curious why the folx constantly commenting on the horrible, disgusting conditions in certain facilities where immigrants who choose to cross the border illegally are kept, have been so quite about literal human feces on the streets of the cities they govern and on the possibility of infectious diseases that we thought were eradicated coming back.  


I'll tag this here instead of writing another post.

It's possible to be appalled at the conditions that certain immigrants who chose to immigrate illegally are being kept in, and to believe that the conditions in detention centers should meet or exceed certain basic requirements,  while still believing that a temporary detention during the vetting process is necessary.  

In WW2 the standard for axis prisoners held in the US was that they were held in conditions comparable to those experienced by US soldiers.   I would suggest that immigrant accommodations that are on par with those used by our military in basic training would be an appropriate place to start the discussion.