The Biden Administration

180,668 Views | 3573 Replies | Last: 6 hrs ago by Steve Videtich
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

WarrenPeace said:

hokiewolf said:

It's pretty entertaining that one can get mad at a politician both virtue signaling and not virtue signaling based on your personal politics. How about we all shouldn give a hoot what politicians post on Twitter and Facebook


That's a great idea! But since one party's leader was completely banned from social media because people didn't like what he said it's got to go both ways.

Please. "Because people didn't line what he said?" LOL, Yeah I guess I don't jump into the tiger enclosure at the zoo to get a selfie because "I don't like the way getting eaten by the tiger may make me feel."

He was banned from social media because he, the sitting President, wouldn't stop falsely proclaiming our free and fair and democratically held election was fraudulent. These false and completely self-serving claims started months before the election was even held, continued without evidence for a year, and culminated in an armed insurrection at the nation's capital.

He attacked our democracy in an extraordinarily dangerous way that no former president would even have dreamed of. He significantly damaged American faith in our electoral system for no more important reason than because he's a sore loser.

So yeah I guess some people "didn't like" that.

Who did like it? Did you?


No. The blatantly rigged "election" is the "attack on our democracy". This communist coup via a stolen election is an "attack on our democracy". The communist Democrat party who want to shred the 1st and 2nd Amendments are "attacking our democracy". People who have no problem stripping others of their right to free speech are "attacking democracy".

And our nation is a constitutional republic. Not a democracy.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

WarrenPeace said:

hokiewolf said:

It's pretty entertaining that one can get mad at a politician both virtue signaling and not virtue signaling based on your personal politics. How about we all shouldn give a hoot what politicians post on Twitter and Facebook


That's a great idea! But since one party's leader was completely banned from social media because people didn't like what he said it's got to go both ways.

Please. "Because people didn't line what he said?" LOL, Yeah I guess I don't jump into the tiger enclosure at the zoo to get a selfie because "I don't like the way getting eaten by the tiger may make me feel."

He was banned from social media because he, the sitting President, wouldn't stop falsely proclaiming our free and fair and democratically held election was fraudulent. These false and completely self-serving claims started months before the election was even held, continued without evidence for a year, and culminated in an armed insurrection at the nation's capital.

He attacked our democracy in an extraordinarily dangerous way that no former president would even have dreamed of. He significantly damaged American faith in our electoral system for no more important reason than because he's a sore loser.

So yeah I guess some people "didn't like" that.

Who did like it? Did you?


Bull***** He got banned because radical leftist pretindependents wanted to control the message. Iran can post on Facebook and Twitter about extermination of Jews but Trump can't post on either place because TDS. But pretindependents like you pretend it was because of something for the good of the people. Lol. So ridiculous.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

It's pretty entertaining that one can get mad at a politician both virtue signaling and not virtue signaling based on your personal politics. How about we all shouldn give a hoot what politicians post on Twitter and Facebook


Lol. Yeah right.
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If you justify censorship because someone's speech supposedly "attacks faith in our democracy", then you can dream up any excuse to censor people. And it's already been going on for years. YouTube and other big Tech companies have banned all sorts of speech, claiming that certain views are "dangerous", "misinformation", "hateful and offensive", etc.

What this censorship really is all about is enforcing a Leftist-Establishment orthodoxy, and silencing dissidents. Leftists have no problem with speech, for example, that is blatantly racist against white people. And it's a complete farce for them to claim that "misinformation" should be censored, because the entire Marxist-Leftist agenda is based on hundreds of lies.
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TheStorm
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.foxnews.com/us/nyc-woman-punched-face-knocked-unconscious-chinatown

Excused away again...
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TheStorm said:

https://www.foxnews.com/us/nyc-woman-punched-face-knocked-unconscious-chinatown

Excused away again...
what do you mean?
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad said:

Civilized said:

WarrenPeace said:

hokiewolf said:

It's pretty entertaining that one can get mad at a politician both virtue signaling and not virtue signaling based on your personal politics. How about we all shouldn give a hoot what politicians post on Twitter and Facebook


That's a great idea! But since one party's leader was completely banned from social media because people didn't like what he said it's got to go both ways.

Please. "Because people didn't line what he said?" LOL, Yeah I guess I don't jump into the tiger enclosure at the zoo to get a selfie because "I don't like the way getting eaten by the tiger may make me feel."

He was banned from social media because he, the sitting President, wouldn't stop falsely proclaiming our free and fair and democratically held election was fraudulent. These false and completely self-serving claims started months before the election was even held, continued without evidence for a year, and culminated in an armed insurrection at the nation's capital.

He attacked our democracy in an extraordinarily dangerous way that no former president would even have dreamed of. He significantly damaged American faith in our electoral system for no more important reason than because he's a sore loser.

So yeah I guess some people "didn't like" that.

Who did like it? Did you?


Bull***** He got banned because radical leftist pretindependents wanted to control the message. Iran can post on Facebook and Twitter about extermination of Jews but Trump can't post on either place because TDS. But pretindependents like you pretend it was because of something for the good of the people. Lol. So ridiculous.

What's so ridiculous is a sitting American President singlehandedly and significantly sabotaging trust in our electoral process and causing an armed insurrection on our capital because he's a spoiled baby.

We're never having the Facebook and Twitter ban debate if Trump wasn't such a unprecedentedly boundless liar with zero regard for the damage his words wreak.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

packgrad said:

Civilized said:

WarrenPeace said:

hokiewolf said:

It's pretty entertaining that one can get mad at a politician both virtue signaling and not virtue signaling based on your personal politics. How about we all shouldn give a hoot what politicians post on Twitter and Facebook


That's a great idea! But since one party's leader was completely banned from social media because people didn't like what he said it's got to go both ways.

Please. "Because people didn't line what he said?" LOL, Yeah I guess I don't jump into the tiger enclosure at the zoo to get a selfie because "I don't like the way getting eaten by the tiger may make me feel."

He was banned from social media because he, the sitting President, wouldn't stop falsely proclaiming our free and fair and democratically held election was fraudulent. These false and completely self-serving claims started months before the election was even held, continued without evidence for a year, and culminated in an armed insurrection at the nation's capital.

He attacked our democracy in an extraordinarily dangerous way that no former president would even have dreamed of. He significantly damaged American faith in our electoral system for no more important reason than because he's a sore loser.

So yeah I guess some people "didn't like" that.

Who did like it? Did you?


Bull***** He got banned because radical leftist pretindependents wanted to control the message. Iran can post on Facebook and Twitter about extermination of Jews but Trump can't post on either place because TDS. But pretindependents like you pretend it was because of something for the good of the people. Lol. So ridiculous.

What's so ridiculous is a sitting American President singlehandedly and significantly sabotaging trust in our electoral process and causing an armed insurrection on our capital because he's a spoiled baby.

We're never having the Facebook and Twitter ban debate if Trump wasn't such a unprecedentedly boundless liar with zero regard for the damage his words wreak.



Bull***** It's TDS. Nothing more. Hilarious you think it's anything otherwise. Tweets about Exterminating a race is ok to the tds crowd. Hillary saying an election was rigged is ok. Stacey Abrams saying an election was rigged is ok. The entire Democrat party crying collusion is ok. Trump saying the election was rigged, BAN!!!!! So much TDS.

Armed insurrection lol.
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

packgrad said:

Civilized said:

WarrenPeace said:

hokiewolf said:

It's pretty entertaining that one can get mad at a politician both virtue signaling and not virtue signaling based on your personal politics. How about we all shouldn give a hoot what politicians post on Twitter and Facebook


That's a great idea! But since one party's leader was completely banned from social media because people didn't like what he said it's got to go both ways.

Please. "Because people didn't line what he said?" LOL, Yeah I guess I don't jump into the tiger enclosure at the zoo to get a selfie because "I don't like the way getting eaten by the tiger may make me feel."

He was banned from social media because he, the sitting President, wouldn't stop falsely proclaiming our free and fair and democratically held election was fraudulent. These false and completely self-serving claims started months before the election was even held, continued without evidence for a year, and culminated in an armed insurrection at the nation's capital.

He attacked our democracy in an extraordinarily dangerous way that no former president would even have dreamed of. He significantly damaged American faith in our electoral system for no more important reason than because he's a sore loser.

So yeah I guess some people "didn't like" that.

Who did like it? Did you?


Bull***** He got banned because radical leftist pretindependents wanted to control the message. Iran can post on Facebook and Twitter about extermination of Jews but Trump can't post on either place because TDS. But pretindependents like you pretend it was because of something for the good of the people. Lol. So ridiculous.

What's so ridiculous is a sitting American President singlehandedly and significantly sabotaging trust in our electoral process and causing an armed insurrection on our capital because he's a spoiled baby.

We're never having the Facebook and Twitter ban debate if Trump wasn't such a unprecedentedly boundless liar with zero regard for the damage his words wreak.



That supposed "armed insurrection" was a peaceful protest. They did not kill anyone, burn down buildings, and damage property.

Meanwhile, Antifa and BLM are rioting, destroying property, burning down buildings, and killing people - and the Leftist media falsely calls those "peaceful protests".

The Democrats and Left are trying to falsely brand patriotic conservatives as "dangerous extremists". Meanwhile, REAL terrorist organizations like Antifa and BLM are supported by the Establishment.
Glasswolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Look at the video again. Even republican house members were trying to blockade the doors. Mitt Romney was running for his life. There was noose set up to hang mike pense.
Glasswolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I was in dc 2 weeks ago. No property damaged? What world are you living in?
TheStorm
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Glasswolf said:

I was in dc 2 weeks ago. No property damaged? What world are you living in?
LOL. The property damage that you're seeing in DC is from your side... from BEFORE and AFTER January 6... at least pretend that you have been paying attention.
TheStorm
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

TheStorm said:

https://www.foxnews.com/us/nyc-woman-punched-face-knocked-unconscious-chinatown

Excused away again...
what do you mean?
Here you go.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-city-homeless-man-hate-crime-asian-woman
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TheStorm said:

hokiewolf said:

TheStorm said:

https://www.foxnews.com/us/nyc-woman-punched-face-knocked-unconscious-chinatown

Excused away again...
what do you mean?
Here you go.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-city-homeless-man-hate-crime-asian-woman
Thank you for the updated article. I agree with you that people charged with violent offenses should not be released without punishment. In particular, this man seems to have some real troubling issues as well.
cowboypack02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

packgrad said:

Civilized said:

WarrenPeace said:

hokiewolf said:

It's pretty entertaining that one can get mad at a politician both virtue signaling and not virtue signaling based on your personal politics. How about we all shouldn give a hoot what politicians post on Twitter and Facebook


That's a great idea! But since one party's leader was completely banned from social media because people didn't like what he said it's got to go both ways.

Please. "Because people didn't line what he said?" LOL, Yeah I guess I don't jump into the tiger enclosure at the zoo to get a selfie because "I don't like the way getting eaten by the tiger may make me feel."

He was banned from social media because he, the sitting President, wouldn't stop falsely proclaiming our free and fair and democratically held election was fraudulent. These false and completely self-serving claims started months before the election was even held, continued without evidence for a year, and culminated in an armed insurrection at the nation's capital.

He attacked our democracy in an extraordinarily dangerous way that no former president would even have dreamed of. He significantly damaged American faith in our electoral system for no more important reason than because he's a sore loser.

So yeah I guess some people "didn't like" that.

Who did like it? Did you?


Bull***** He got banned because radical leftist pretindependents wanted to control the message. Iran can post on Facebook and Twitter about extermination of Jews but Trump can't post on either place because TDS. But pretindependents like you pretend it was because of something for the good of the people. Lol. So ridiculous.

What's so ridiculous is a sitting American President singlehandedly and significantly sabotaging trust in our electoral process and causing an armed insurrection on our capital because he's a spoiled baby.

We're never having the Facebook and Twitter ban debate if Trump wasn't such a unprecedentedly boundless liar with zero regard for the damage his words wreak.

I'd like a discussion on what he actually said...not what the media (who we can all agree is greatly bias) said that he said.

What did Trump say or do that is outside the bounds of what other politicians and people in general have said and done? You act like DC didn't get set on fire and people didn't say that they wanted to blow up the White House the day of Trump's inauguration. I'm pretty sure that I heard democrat politicians, including the two highest ranked democrats politically when Trump was president, say that the 2016 election was fraudulent.

An insurrection you say? Here are a few of the things that happened while Trump was president
  • Chuck Schumer leading people to the doors of the Supreme Court and screaming at the top of his lungs that there would be consequences for Trump nominating Kavanaugh as a SC Judge. All while democrats that Schumer is leading are beating on the doors to the SC
  • The Secret Service had to set up a barrier near the White House and agents were attacked while democrat politicians cheered them on in 2020 while DC was on fire
  • AOC lead a group of protesters into the Hart building and occupied Nancy Pelosi's office in 2018
  • A democrat, who worked for the Sanders campaign, tried to gun down a bunch of republican congressmen and senators during a baseball practice
  • Republicans being assaulted by protestors while trying to leave the White House after Trump accepted the nomination to run for president a second time, all while democrats cheered them on.

If Trump saying that people should go protest "Peacefully and Patriotically" is inciting an insurrection...i'd love to hear your thoughts on the things that happened while he was in office from the democrat side of the aisle.

As far as armed.....maybe they were...i dunno...but i do know that the only person shot and killed was a protestor.




hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yeah, it's not like they detonated a bomb in the Senate chamber

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_United_States_Senate_bombing
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

WarrenPeace said:

hokiewolf said:

It's pretty entertaining that one can get mad at a politician both virtue signaling and not virtue signaling based on your personal politics. How about we all shouldn give a hoot what politicians post on Twitter and Facebook


That's a great idea! But since one party's leader was completely banned from social media because people didn't like what he said it's got to go both ways.

Please. "Because people didn't line what he said?" LOL, Yeah I guess I don't jump into the tiger enclosure at the zoo to get a selfie because "I don't like the way getting eaten by the tiger may make me feel."

He was banned from social media because he, the sitting President, wouldn't stop falsely proclaiming our free and fair and democratically held election was fraudulent. These false and completely self-serving claims started months before the election was even held, continued without evidence for a year, and culminated in an armed insurrection at the nation's capital.

He attacked our democracy in an extraordinarily dangerous way that no former president would even have dreamed of. He significantly damaged American faith in our electoral system for no more important reason than because he's a sore loser.

So yeah I guess some people "didn't like" that.

Who did like it? Did you?
WRONG!!!! He s banned for the same reason we had the Russia hoax. The Uniparty wanted him gone! BTW, audits are starting to ramp up all over the place. More than Trump knows this election was an absolute mess!!!

Oh, and it was the China Virus!!! Those narratives stated by the liberals (or so-called independents) here are all starting to unravel... TRUMP 2024!!!!!
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

packgrad said:

Civilized said:

WarrenPeace said:

hokiewolf said:

It's pretty entertaining that one can get mad at a politician both virtue signaling and not virtue signaling based on your personal politics. How about we all shouldn give a hoot what politicians post on Twitter and Facebook


That's a great idea! But since one party's leader was completely banned from social media because people didn't like what he said it's got to go both ways.

Please. "Because people didn't line what he said?" LOL, Yeah I guess I don't jump into the tiger enclosure at the zoo to get a selfie because "I don't like the way getting eaten by the tiger may make me feel."

He was banned from social media because he, the sitting President, wouldn't stop falsely proclaiming our free and fair and democratically held election was fraudulent. These false and completely self-serving claims started months before the election was even held, continued without evidence for a year, and culminated in an armed insurrection at the nation's capital.

He attacked our democracy in an extraordinarily dangerous way that no former president would even have dreamed of. He significantly damaged American faith in our electoral system for no more important reason than because he's a sore loser.

So yeah I guess some people "didn't like" that.

Who did like it? Did you?


Bull***** He got banned because radical leftist pretindependents wanted to control the message. Iran can post on Facebook and Twitter about extermination of Jews but Trump can't post on either place because TDS. But pretindependents like you pretend it was because of something for the good of the people. Lol. So ridiculous.

What's so ridiculous is a sitting American President singlehandedly and significantly sabotaging trust in our electoral process and causing an armed insurrection on our capital because he's a spoiled baby.

We're never having the Facebook and Twitter ban debate if Trump wasn't such a unprecedentedly boundless liar with zero regard for the damage his words wreak.

WRONG!!!! Anybody that says the things you say (we have plenty here) is a spoiled baby!!!! Armed Insurrection???? The only person killed was a person that supported Trump! And yes, the officer the killed the lady is a BLM activist that happens to hold a job!
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
To all the liberals here:

All these pissing matches going on here are noise. The real issue is the value of the dollar. If the dollar is no longer the world currency, anything that anybody wants to do is dead! Everyone here has seen all kinds of things; however, no one here has ever lived when the US Dollar is not the world currency. The advantages that gives us is immeasurable.

As one person said: our biggest export is our dollar! Every world transaction has to be converted to the dollar.

So, why is this administration wanting to kill the dollar? We have been really spending too much money for years; now, this administration wants to spend at a level never seen. Why? Is this purposeful?

The bond market is saying they don't believe in this administration. That's a problem! Who is going to buy the bonds to finance this spending? Nobody! Well, they might at a much higher interest. Can we afford that? Most economist will say, No!
cowboypack02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

Yeah, it's not like they detonated a bomb in the Senate chamber

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_United_States_Senate_bombing


Just because you teed it up for me so well.

Two of the people that were involved in this, Linda Evans and Susan Rosenberg, both has their sentences commuted by a democrat (Bill Clinton)

It's also worth mentioning that Susan Rosenberg sits on the board of Thousand Currents...which of all things provided fundraising and fiscal sponsorship for Black Lives Matter. Not that I'm saying that BLM are terrorist, but they are there when alot of cities seem to get burnt down, including DC.
TheStorm
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

TheStorm said:

hokiewolf said:

TheStorm said:

https://www.foxnews.com/us/nyc-woman-punched-face-knocked-unconscious-chinatown

Excused away again...
what do you mean?
Here you go.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-city-homeless-man-hate-crime-asian-woman
Thank you for the updated article. I agree with you that people charged with violent offenses should not be released without punishment. In particular, this man seems to have some real troubling issues as well.
Thanks, but I didn't need the updated article to know what the deal was and I'm sure that you didn't either... as soon as I read "Bellevue" in the first article, I knew that it would be excused away... and you were lying in wait, twitching and ready to jump on the bait, weren't you?

Better response the 2nd time though (and a good thing that you didn't jump out of the bushes the first time)...
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TheStorm said:

hokiewolf said:

TheStorm said:

hokiewolf said:

TheStorm said:

https://www.foxnews.com/us/nyc-woman-punched-face-knocked-unconscious-chinatown

Excused away again...
what do you mean?
Here you go.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-city-homeless-man-hate-crime-asian-woman
Thank you for the updated article. I agree with you that people charged with violent offenses should not be released without punishment. In particular, this man seems to have some real troubling issues as well.
Thanks, but I didn't need the updated article to know what the deal was and I'm sure that you didn't either... as soon as I read "Bellevue" in the first article, I knew that it would be excused away... and you were lying in wait, twitching and ready to jump on the bait, weren't you?

Better response the 2nd time though (and a good thing that you didn't jump out of the bushes the first time)...
I'm really unsure of what exactly you're trying to accuse me of doing but the second article provides a lot more detail of this particular mans past violent history. There needs to be an examination as to why he was continually released.
TheStorm
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aww c'mon, hokie... we both know that you were ready to jump me... thanks for showing enough restraint not to though, I got a kick out of it.

You did good!
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Lol, when the EU becomes the grownups in the room you know you've started to push policy too far left.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/europe-pushes-alternative-to-u-s-backed-covid-19-vaccine-patent-waiver-plan-11622732952
BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
With Sleepy Joe and the folks that are in D.C. now there isn't a "far enough left" for them until they have single party rule, wealth redistribution, abandoning the current Constitution in favor of a more "woke" version that offers reparations, awarding of land and a guaranteed basic income for minorities and people of color and last but not least open borders.

My question for you lefties is that with the borders being open, and they are, when will white people become the minority?

Does that mean that we will get all the freebies, handouts and preferential government deals like Sleepy Joe has promised?

Or is the plan all along been keep the country divided around racial lines so that the SOCIALIST PARTY can remain in power?

Remember.... "if you don't vote for Joe Biden you ain't black..."

Biggest racist in D.C. is Sleepy Joe.
Big Bad Wolf. OG...2002

ONE WOLF. ONE PACK.

"All silencing of discussion is an assumption of infallibility" - John Stuart Mill - renowned SOCIALIST....
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BBW12OG said:

With Sleepy Joe and the folks that are in D.C. now there isn't a "far enough left" for them until they have single party rule, wealth redistribution, abandoning the current Constitution in favor of a more "woke" version that offers reparations, awarding of land and a guaranteed basic income for minorities and people of color and last but not least open borders.

My question for you lefties is that with the borders being open, and they are, when will white people become the minority?

Does that mean that we will get all the freebies, handouts and preferential government deals like Sleepy Joe has promised?

Or is the plan all along been keep the country divided around racial lines so that the SOCIALIST PARTY can remain in power?

Remember.... "if you don't vote for Joe Biden you ain't black..."

Biggest racist in D.C. is Sleepy Joe.
here is where we disagree. The border isn't open for legal immigration. It's open for illegal immigration. The way to solve the problem at the border is to create more paths to coming to the country legally. I've never understood this nativist stance of the Republican Party. If they did the above, they would get all those votes.

I'll never understand the current policy (the last 39 years) where we are trying to regulate a black market.

I'll also never be upset with someone wanting to come to America and improve their lot in life if they are willing to put the work in.
cowboypack02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

BBW12OG said:

With Sleepy Joe and the folks that are in D.C. now there isn't a "far enough left" for them until they have single party rule, wealth redistribution, abandoning the current Constitution in favor of a more "woke" version that offers reparations, awarding of land and a guaranteed basic income for minorities and people of color and last but not least open borders.

My question for you lefties is that with the borders being open, and they are, when will white people become the minority?

Does that mean that we will get all the freebies, handouts and preferential government deals like Sleepy Joe has promised?

Or is the plan all along been keep the country divided around racial lines so that the SOCIALIST PARTY can remain in power?

Remember.... "if you don't vote for Joe Biden you ain't black..."

Biggest racist in D.C. is Sleepy Joe.
here is where we disagree. The border isn't open for legal immigration. It's open for illegal immigration. The way to solve the problem at the border is to create more paths to coming to the country legally. I've never understood this nativist stance of the Republican Party. If they did the above, they would get all those votes.

I'll never understand the current policy (the last 39 years) where we are trying to regulate a black market.

I'll also never be upset with someone wanting to come to America and improve their lot in life if they are willing to put the work in.
I think you have to fix the door before people can come in through it.

Why would people go through the legal routes when they can just hop the border or overstay their visas and end up with all of the same benefits?
IseWolf22
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboypack02 said:

hokiewolf said:

BBW12OG said:

With Sleepy Joe and the folks that are in D.C. now there isn't a "far enough left" for them until they have single party rule, wealth redistribution, abandoning the current Constitution in favor of a more "woke" version that offers reparations, awarding of land and a guaranteed basic income for minorities and people of color and last but not least open borders.

My question for you lefties is that with the borders being open, and they are, when will white people become the minority?

Does that mean that we will get all the freebies, handouts and preferential government deals like Sleepy Joe has promised?

Or is the plan all along been keep the country divided around racial lines so that the SOCIALIST PARTY can remain in power?

Remember.... "if you don't vote for Joe Biden you ain't black..."

Biggest racist in D.C. is Sleepy Joe.
here is where we disagree. The border isn't open for legal immigration. It's open for illegal immigration. The way to solve the problem at the border is to create more paths to coming to the country legally. I've never understood this nativist stance of the Republican Party. If they did the above, they would get all those votes.

I'll never understand the current policy (the last 39 years) where we are trying to regulate a black market.

I'll also never be upset with someone wanting to come to America and improve their lot in life if they are willing to put the work in.
I think you have to fix the door before people can come in through it.

Why would people go through the legal routes when they can just hop the border or overstay their visas and end up with all of the same benefits?
It's immensely easier to be here legally than illegally. If it was easier to immigrate legally, that would be what the vast majority do.
If people want to flee here to make a new life, let them. Without plenty of immigrants, we'd be in a population decline
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboypack02 said:

hokiewolf said:

BBW12OG said:

With Sleepy Joe and the folks that are in D.C. now there isn't a "far enough left" for them until they have single party rule, wealth redistribution, abandoning the current Constitution in favor of a more "woke" version that offers reparations, awarding of land and a guaranteed basic income for minorities and people of color and last but not least open borders.

My question for you lefties is that with the borders being open, and they are, when will white people become the minority?

Does that mean that we will get all the freebies, handouts and preferential government deals like Sleepy Joe has promised?

Or is the plan all along been keep the country divided around racial lines so that the SOCIALIST PARTY can remain in power?

Remember.... "if you don't vote for Joe Biden you ain't black..."

Biggest racist in D.C. is Sleepy Joe.
here is where we disagree. The border isn't open for legal immigration. It's open for illegal immigration. The way to solve the problem at the border is to create more paths to coming to the country legally. I've never understood this nativist stance of the Republican Party. If they did the above, they would get all those votes.

I'll never understand the current policy (the last 39 years) where we are trying to regulate a black market.

I'll also never be upset with someone wanting to come to America and improve their lot in life if they are willing to put the work in.
I think you have to fix the door before people can come in through it.

Why would people go through the legal routes when they can just hop the border or overstay their visas and end up with all of the same benefits?

They end up with some of the same benefits, not all, and that assumes they are ever able to safely cross the border and then don't get deported at some point after, which would put them in legal jeopardy and potentially split up their family.

Your question is somewhat akin to asking why people even have typical jobs when it's easier to just commit crime and not have to work In legal, conventional ways. The question understates the physical and legal risk of the illegal behavior and overstates how easy it is to perpetrate it.

No path in life is easy, but most humans undertake risk and benefit analysis even if they don't realize it.

Reducing barriers to legal immigration could remove many of the disincentives from trying to immigrate legally and encourage more people contemplating illegal immigration to go the legal route instead.
PackFansXL
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Many, if not most, border hoppers already actively find the Border Patrol agents because this gets them processed in the system faster than getting caught later at some town not on the border. I would guess this technique is far more prevalent during this administration than it was in the previous one.

The biggest issue for people illegally crossing the border is they aren't getting properly assimilated into American society so that they and/or their children learn English, become productive members of American society, and begin climbing the socioeconomic ladder. This is because future border crossers will keep the like skilled labor supply unlimited which reduces pressure for wage increases for these folks. Caesar Chavez, the late Latino activist, was quoted saying illegal border crossers were hurting the people who entered legally by wage suppression. He even said he would deport his own mother if she crossed illegally. That's how strongly he felt about illegal immigration.
IseWolf22
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PackFansXL said:

Many, if not most, border hoppers already actively find the Border Patrol agents because this gets them processed in the system faster than getting caught later at some town not on the border. I would guess this technique is far more prevalent during this administration than it was in the previous one.

The biggest issue for people illegally crossing the border is they aren't getting properly assimilated into American society so that they and/or their children learn English, become productive members of American society, and begin climbing the socioeconomic ladder. This is because future border crossers will keep the like skilled labor supply unlimited which reduces pressure for wage increases for these folks. Caesar Chavez, the late Latino activist, was quoted saying illegal border crossers were hurting the people who entered legally by wage suppression. He even said he would deport his own mother if she crossed illegally. That's how strongly he felt about illegal immigration.
We probably do the best job of assimilating immigrants of any of the 1st world nations. 2nd generation immigrants are by and large, very productive members of society. Immigrants are often cultural conservatives as well and the GOP could pick up huge number of votes by positioning themselves as more pro-immigration.
PackFansXL
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IseWolf22 said:


We probably do the best job of assimilating immigrants of any of the 1st world nations. 2nd generation immigrants are by and large, very productive members of society. Immigrants are often cultural conservatives as well and the GOP could pick up huge number of votes by positioning themselves as more pro-immigration.
This is true of legal immigrants and was the path followed by a huge portion of upwardly mobile Latinos in the agricultural regions of California. That traditional success has diminished significantly with the rise of illegals.

As I recall, W Bush was and is very pro immigration as long as it is legal immigration. There have been some successes in California with Latinos in the Republican party as well. Again, the key is legal and managed immigration. One could argue that unmanaged immigration is supported by racist views held by the current party in power that people of color are more likely to vote for the handout/identity party at least during the initial generation.
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PackFansXL said:

IseWolf22 said:


We probably do the best job of assimilating immigrants of any of the 1st world nations. 2nd generation immigrants are by and large, very productive members of society. Immigrants are often cultural conservatives as well and the GOP could pick up huge number of votes by positioning themselves as more pro-immigration.
This is true of legal immigrants and was the path followed by a huge portion of upwardly mobile Latinos in the agricultural regions of California. That traditional success has diminished significantly with the rise of illegals.

As I recall, W Bush was and is very pro immigration as long as it is legal immigration. There have been some successes in California with Latinos in the Republican party as well. Again, the key is legal and managed immigration. One could argue that unmanaged immigration is supported by racist views held by the current party in power that people of color are more likely to vote for the handout/identity party at least during the initial generation.
pure tribalism aka party victory over compromise and country victory
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

BBW12OG said:

With Sleepy Joe and the folks that are in D.C. now there isn't a "far enough left" for them until they have single party rule, wealth redistribution, abandoning the current Constitution in favor of a more "woke" version that offers reparations, awarding of land and a guaranteed basic income for minorities and people of color and last but not least open borders.

My question for you lefties is that with the borders being open, and they are, when will white people become the minority?

Does that mean that we will get all the freebies, handouts and preferential government deals like Sleepy Joe has promised?

Or is the plan all along been keep the country divided around racial lines so that the SOCIALIST PARTY can remain in power?

Remember.... "if you don't vote for Joe Biden you ain't black..."

Biggest racist in D.C. is Sleepy Joe.
here is where we disagree. The border isn't open for legal immigration. It's open for illegal immigration. The way to solve the problem at the border is to create more paths to coming to the country legally. I've never understood this nativist stance of the Republican Party. If they did the above, they would get all those votes.

I'll never understand the current policy (the last 39 years) where we are trying to regulate a black market.

I'll also never be upset with someone wanting to come to America and improve their lot in life if they are willing to put the work in.
We have enough illegals already in this country that I would put a moratorium on legal immigration for 10+ years. At some point, if you really care about people, already in the USA, then you will stop "ALL" immigration, legal or illegal.

You folks, on here, have no idea what it takes to compete in a job market with illegals! When you start to consider how immigration may affect your personal income, then we can talk. Until then, get over yourself and care about the American Worker!!!

Stop the debate!!!!
First Page Last Page
Page 28 of 103
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.