I think he's pivoting on this in order to secure aid for Ukraine and I'm not so much bothered by it. He's at least appearing hawkish on border control to take away a talking point from the GOP, so they can't use that as an excuse for holding up aid to Ukraine (chances are they'll find something else, but they won't have this to rally around). In my mind, Ukraine is perhaps one of The most important foreign policy issues facing the world right now, it's the line in the sand where we can stop Russia and make them pay for all the bullshit psyop fuckery they've been inflicting on the rest of the world for at least the past decade or more, not to mention preventing them from invading any other countries. Ukraine has fought hard for the past 2-3 years and they deserve our help more than anybody else in the world (way more than Israel). Russia is a genuine agent of chaos in the world, they thrive on it and they've learned to take advantage of it, stopping them there makes the world a better place and it's the right thing to do.
This one read the article. ☝🏼🤓
I don't think it's surprising, I don't think the Democratic Party really means to be as lax on border issues as the Republicans make them out to be. They want more liberal immigration policies, and are willing to give illegals who were brought here as kids a path to citizenship, but that is different than letting just anyone go over the border, today.
It's not so much of a shift as it is we've all gotten used to the Republican narrative on this, this "open borders" stuff. I don't think a single Democrat wants to take all the migrants that can come right now. But Democratx want to treat them like humans while we figure out what to do with them. Bit that's too radical for most Republicans, I guess.
There were more deportations from the Obama administration than both the Trump and Bush Admins. Clinton deported more people than any president before him back to Grover Cleveland. Obama had over a million more people deported in the 8 years he was in office than Bush had in his 8 Years. The bs right wing talking points are easily proven false and there is plenty of evidence to prove them false but once the idiots hear something they latch on to it and believe it no matter what. The only difference between right wing immigration policies and left wing immigration policies is the left wing tries to treat immigrants like human beings and is easier on those seeking asylum.
Funny I just reread your comment and saw you mentioned something about treating people like humans I agree and that's my point also.
left wing tries to treat immigrants like human beings
Is that why Obama/Biden built the cages for kids? And why immigrants this last summer were were subjected to inhumane heat in Texas and Arizona, many days exceeding 120* outdoor temps, and the ones housed inside with no air-conditioning? In the same inhumane conditions that liberals were in an uproar about when Trump was President.
Debating with you isn't worth my time based on your post history. Here is a WP article about the differences between Obama and Trump relating to your post and mine.
Trump set the precedent with zero tolerance and Biden has run with it, like he has most of Trumps worst policies.
Stunning? It's not even surprising.
If he can use an executive order to go over congress' head and send weapons to Israel he can use an executive order for this shit, too.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
President Joe Biden’s evolution on the key election issue of immigration entered a new phase when he promised to “shut down the border right now” if given new powers by Congress.
The deeper policy context of the comments, delivered at a campaign event in South Carolina Saturday and in a statement from the White House on Friday, is that Biden wants to resuscitate a bipartisan deal to pair new border powers with additional military aid for Ukraine and Israel.
“As the leader of our party, there is zero chance I will support this horrible, open-borders betrayal of America,” Trump said in Nevada on Saturday, although future Republican presidents would also benefit from the new power Biden is seeking.
“But his administration has faced the harsh realities and challenges at the US-Mexico border amid record migration across the Western Hemisphere — making it a political vulnerability seized on by Republicans.”
Appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” Lankford was pressed about the new authority for Biden, which would be triggered if there’s an average of 5,000 migrant crossings per day over the course of a full week.
Meanwhile, mayors of Democratic cities continue to raise the alarm about an untenable wave of migrants bused north from border states and draining their infrastructure.
The original article contains 1,074 words, the summary contains 209 words. Saved 81%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
I know this is highly politicised in the USA but almost every other country in the world (yes the left leaning ones too) don't have open borders.
A border wall or whatever is actually pretty normal and the standard. Are democrats actually opposed to this or are they just hating on it because Trump suggested it?
The US doesn't have open borders and most borders in the world have no barriers at all. I'm not sure where you've got walls all along your border such that you think it's normal.
Most US borders dont have walls, good grief what are they talking about.
They're saying other countries are all walled up, which is also complete nonsense.
Lol there's no forts if that's what you have in mind. But there's border controls and limited walls where people hit the border. If people start entering illegally they extend the walls as needed.
Recent examples would be Colombia, Finland and Greece
Here's an image with marks for the border barriers throughout the world from the Economist around Trump's election. You'll notice how most borders don't have them. No one is saying no barriers exist, but they are not the norm. The US had some before Trump and the presence or absence of border fences has nothing to do with whether a border is "open".
I've gone overland from Singapore to Paris and from Alaska to Argentina and a lot of other travel and I've only ever been able to just walk over the border in two places (Paraguay/brazil and iran/Pakistan)
Oh with obvious exceptions once inside Europe etc.
That you didn't hike into the wilderness to find the unfenced border has nothing to do with whether those crossings existed. The US also has border barriers around regular road crossings and tourists, like yourself, just use those places.
The issue isn't so much the wall, it's that there's no sense of priority. Our immigration system is dog shit and desperately needs to be reformed. Instead of putting any effort into that, we're huffing and puffing about a wall. It's just the wrong focus and we fully understand it's less about immigrants and more about Mexicans. Most illegal aliens are people who arrive by boat or plane, not crossing the southern border. They're people who over stay their visas. We never hear about that, or any plan to combat that. We only ever hear about the stupid border wall
Yeah legal immigration definitely needs an overhaul in the USA.
I think it would probably get more steam if the border was less porous though.
It's a hard sell to let in more legal immigrants when you can show photos of crowds swarming the border.
I do not want Russia to win, but aren't we really getting to the point that Biden needs to cut his losses on aiding Ukraine and the world will have to hope that Europe steps up?
Edit: If you disagree, please tell me at what point the concessions to the Republicans are too much to agree to in order to fund sending weapons to Ukraine.
Honestly, this is how government works in our system.
It’s not perfect but it’s how things get done and letting Russia win would set a TERRIBLE precedent for their future expansion goals and for China’s inevitable moves on Taiwan.
Nothing short of domestic capitulation to fascism is too much to stop support for Ukraine. We can reverse shitty policies. We can't reverse the destruction of sovereignty and genocide of a people by an imperialist power.
Isn't denying desperate people asylum capitulation to fascism?
If that were the case, we would have been a fascist state long ago.
There are multiple steps toward fascism and shutting down the border is absolutely one of them.
I don't think we agree on what fascism is, then.
It hits at least two points on Eco's 14 features of fascism-
Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”
Appeal to social frustration. “One of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.”
There's a reason that's it's 14 points, and not 2 points. I can name any number of things that fit individual points or small combinations of points, yet are very distinctly not fascism or a step towards fascism. Fascism is a movement, an ideology, a worldview, not a single policy.
A movement that Republicans embrace, so how many concessions should they be given?
As I said, any number of concessions on policy that do not increase their power (ie capitulation to fascism).
Giving them what they want does increase their power.
Do you think they're going to allow the border to be opened again and asylum seekers allowed in again one of these days because they love immigrants so much?
Giving them what they want does increase their power.
93% of Americans share some concern about border. Do your really think holding out on behalf of principles and us 7% of sane individuals strengthens the non-fascists, in a democratic system?
Do you think they’re going to allow the border to be opened again and asylum seekers allowed in again one of these days because they love immigrants so much?
... do you think that's what the current compromise bill being proposed does? And do you think that any policy enacted will be unable to be repealed under a non-fascist government?
I understand the sentiment. We’re now in the early stages of Idiocracy where Americans don’t understand support for Ukraine. I’ve tried explaining it and they just don’t get it. The U.S. is heading towards isolationism and it won’t change whether it’s a democrat or republican in office. All that we can hope is that Biden wins while still keeping in line with his advisors.
There’s also the chance that Trump finally releases his grip on the GOP (not willingly, of course) and Republicans start to come back to reality. Then we could have people like Lankford be the new standard for GOP senators as opposed to Cruz, Blackburn, and Hawley. At least he’ll work with Democrats. The rest only want to obstruct. And when they only want to obstruct, we’re left with a broken border system and a strategic ally scrambling for spare ammo.
I think he's pivoting on this in order to secure aid for Ukraine and I'm not so much bothered by it. He's at least appearing hawkish on border control to take away a talking point from the GOP, so they can't use that as an excuse for holding up aid to Ukraine (chances are they'll find something else, but they won't have this to rally around). In my mind, Ukraine is perhaps one of The most important foreign policy issues facing the world right now, it's the line in the sand where we can stop Russia and make them pay for all the bullshit psyop fuckery they've been inflicting on the rest of the world for at least the past decade or more, not to mention preventing them from invading any other countries. Ukraine has fought hard for the past 2-3 years and they deserve our help more than anybody else in the world (way more than Israel). Russia is a genuine agent of chaos in the world, they thrive on it and they've learned to take advantage of it, stopping them there makes the world a better place and it's the right thing to do.
This one read the article. ☝🏼🤓
I don't think it's surprising, I don't think the Democratic Party really means to be as lax on border issues as the Republicans make them out to be. They want more liberal immigration policies, and are willing to give illegals who were brought here as kids a path to citizenship, but that is different than letting just anyone go over the border, today.
It's not so much of a shift as it is we've all gotten used to the Republican narrative on this, this "open borders" stuff. I don't think a single Democrat wants to take all the migrants that can come right now. But Democratx want to treat them like humans while we figure out what to do with them. Bit that's too radical for most Republicans, I guess.
There were more deportations from the Obama administration than both the Trump and Bush Admins. Clinton deported more people than any president before him back to Grover Cleveland. Obama had over a million more people deported in the 8 years he was in office than Bush had in his 8 Years. The bs right wing talking points are easily proven false and there is plenty of evidence to prove them false but once the idiots hear something they latch on to it and believe it no matter what. The only difference between right wing immigration policies and left wing immigration policies is the left wing tries to treat immigrants like human beings and is easier on those seeking asylum.
Funny I just reread your comment and saw you mentioned something about treating people like humans I agree and that's my point also.
Is that why Obama/Biden built the cages for kids? And why immigrants this last summer were were subjected to inhumane heat in Texas and Arizona, many days exceeding 120* outdoor temps, and the ones housed inside with no air-conditioning? In the same inhumane conditions that liberals were in an uproar about when Trump was President.
Debating with you isn't worth my time based on your post history. Here is a WP article about the differences between Obama and Trump relating to your post and mine.
‘Kids in cages’ It’s true that Obama built the cages at the border. But Trump’s ‘zero tolerance’ immigration policy had no precedent.
Trump set the precedent with zero tolerance and Biden has run with it, like he has most of Trumps worst policies.
Stunning? It's not even surprising.
If he can use an executive order to go over congress' head and send weapons to Israel he can use an executive order for this shit, too.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
President Joe Biden’s evolution on the key election issue of immigration entered a new phase when he promised to “shut down the border right now” if given new powers by Congress.
The deeper policy context of the comments, delivered at a campaign event in South Carolina Saturday and in a statement from the White House on Friday, is that Biden wants to resuscitate a bipartisan deal to pair new border powers with additional military aid for Ukraine and Israel.
“As the leader of our party, there is zero chance I will support this horrible, open-borders betrayal of America,” Trump said in Nevada on Saturday, although future Republican presidents would also benefit from the new power Biden is seeking.
“But his administration has faced the harsh realities and challenges at the US-Mexico border amid record migration across the Western Hemisphere — making it a political vulnerability seized on by Republicans.”
Appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” Lankford was pressed about the new authority for Biden, which would be triggered if there’s an average of 5,000 migrant crossings per day over the course of a full week.
Meanwhile, mayors of Democratic cities continue to raise the alarm about an untenable wave of migrants bused north from border states and draining their infrastructure.
The original article contains 1,074 words, the summary contains 209 words. Saved 81%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
I know this is highly politicised in the USA but almost every other country in the world (yes the left leaning ones too) don't have open borders.
A border wall or whatever is actually pretty normal and the standard. Are democrats actually opposed to this or are they just hating on it because Trump suggested it?
The US doesn't have open borders and most borders in the world have no barriers at all. I'm not sure where you've got walls all along your border such that you think it's normal.
Most US borders dont have walls, good grief what are they talking about.
They're saying other countries are all walled up, which is also complete nonsense.
Lol there's no forts if that's what you have in mind. But there's border controls and limited walls where people hit the border. If people start entering illegally they extend the walls as needed.
Recent examples would be Colombia, Finland and Greece
Here's an image with marks for the border barriers throughout the world from the Economist around Trump's election. You'll notice how most borders don't have them. No one is saying no barriers exist, but they are not the norm. The US had some before Trump and the presence or absence of border fences has nothing to do with whether a border is "open".
I've gone overland from Singapore to Paris and from Alaska to Argentina and a lot of other travel and I've only ever been able to just walk over the border in two places (Paraguay/brazil and iran/Pakistan)
Oh with obvious exceptions once inside Europe etc.
That you didn't hike into the wilderness to find the unfenced border has nothing to do with whether those crossings existed. The US also has border barriers around regular road crossings and tourists, like yourself, just use those places.
The issue isn't so much the wall, it's that there's no sense of priority. Our immigration system is dog shit and desperately needs to be reformed. Instead of putting any effort into that, we're huffing and puffing about a wall. It's just the wrong focus and we fully understand it's less about immigrants and more about Mexicans. Most illegal aliens are people who arrive by boat or plane, not crossing the southern border. They're people who over stay their visas. We never hear about that, or any plan to combat that. We only ever hear about the stupid border wall
Yeah legal immigration definitely needs an overhaul in the USA.
I think it would probably get more steam if the border was less porous though.
It's a hard sell to let in more legal immigrants when you can show photos of crowds swarming the border.
I do not want Russia to win, but aren't we really getting to the point that Biden needs to cut his losses on aiding Ukraine and the world will have to hope that Europe steps up?
Edit: If you disagree, please tell me at what point the concessions to the Republicans are too much to agree to in order to fund sending weapons to Ukraine.
Honestly, this is how government works in our system.
It’s not perfect but it’s how things get done and letting Russia win would set a TERRIBLE precedent for their future expansion goals and for China’s inevitable moves on Taiwan.
Nothing short of domestic capitulation to fascism is too much to stop support for Ukraine. We can reverse shitty policies. We can't reverse the destruction of sovereignty and genocide of a people by an imperialist power.
Isn't denying desperate people asylum capitulation to fascism?
If that were the case, we would have been a fascist state long ago.
There are multiple steps toward fascism and shutting down the border is absolutely one of them.
I don't think we agree on what fascism is, then.
It hits at least two points on Eco's 14 features of fascism-
Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”
Appeal to social frustration. “One of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.”
https://www.openculture.com/2016/11/umberto-eco-makes-a-list-of-the-14-common-features-of-fascism.html
There's a reason that's it's 14 points, and not 2 points. I can name any number of things that fit individual points or small combinations of points, yet are very distinctly not fascism or a step towards fascism. Fascism is a movement, an ideology, a worldview, not a single policy.
A movement that Republicans embrace, so how many concessions should they be given?
As I said, any number of concessions on policy that do not increase their power (ie capitulation to fascism).
Giving them what they want does increase their power.
Do you think they're going to allow the border to be opened again and asylum seekers allowed in again one of these days because they love immigrants so much?
93% of Americans share some concern about border. Do your really think holding out on behalf of principles and us 7% of sane individuals strengthens the non-fascists, in a democratic system?
... do you think that's what the current compromise bill being proposed does? And do you think that any policy enacted will be unable to be repealed under a non-fascist government?
I understand the sentiment. We’re now in the early stages of Idiocracy where Americans don’t understand support for Ukraine. I’ve tried explaining it and they just don’t get it. The U.S. is heading towards isolationism and it won’t change whether it’s a democrat or republican in office. All that we can hope is that Biden wins while still keeping in line with his advisors.
There’s also the chance that Trump finally releases his grip on the GOP (not willingly, of course) and Republicans start to come back to reality. Then we could have people like Lankford be the new standard for GOP senators as opposed to Cruz, Blackburn, and Hawley. At least he’ll work with Democrats. The rest only want to obstruct. And when they only want to obstruct, we’re left with a broken border system and a strategic ally scrambling for spare ammo.