Link, please.

[JoeMemphis]

Then I have two questions for you.

1. How would you define a closed border?
2. And then, when has our border EVER met your definition? Under Trump? Bush? Ever?

If it's never met that definition, it is not a "Biden/current admin" problem. No?



That is not the definition of the word "transitory". You asked ME (and others on this board) that question. The term "transitory" means

Webster's says: "Temporary, not permanent".

I think our current inflation is not permanent. I never said how long or short lived it would be. IMHO, the Biden admin is probably hoping the decline will start before November, but they may not get lucky.

I don’t know that I would try to “close” the border. I think control is a better word and I cannot remember a time when we truly controlled the border. I mean when you arrest people who have been deported multiple times, you really don’t control your border. I do think that Biden’s border policies have exacerbated an already bad problem. Since Biden is the current occupant of the Oval Office, it is his problem. That doesn’t change just because he chooses to ignore it. JMHO.

You can surface coat and mice words all you choose. I think trying to sell inflation as being transitory was a gimmick/excuse by the administration. It didn’t work so then they moved onto another talking point. Lipstick on a pig.

[gounion]

I don’t know that I would try to “close” the border. I think control is a better word and I cannot remember a time when we truly controlled the border. I mean when you arrest people who have been deported multiple times, you really don’t control your border. I do think that Biden’s border policies have exacerbated an already bad problem. Since Biden is the current occupant of the Oval Office, it is his problem. That doesn’t change just because he chooses to ignore it. JMHO.

You can surface coat and mice words all you choose. I think trying to sell inflation as being transitory was a gimmick/excuse by the administration. It didn’t work so then they moved onto another talking point. Lipstick on a pig.

You only bitch about these issues when Dems are in charge. The border really hasn't changed for decades. And, of course, Trump's wall was a scam, as is everything about the GOP today.

[carmenjonze]

I don’t know that I have said my opinions were “facts”. In fact, I have repeated time and again, that what I post are my opinions. Others here seem to believe everything they write are “facts” when more often than not, it’s only opinion.

It’s a discussion board. Everyone here has opinions.

These are not "opinions" of yours, they're baldfaced assertions that until you prove them, they're just lies about this board:

You know, the border is closed, inflation is transitory, etc,etc,etc.

Point out where anyone expressed the opinion that the border is closed.

Link to where anyone claimed inflation is transitory.

Liar.

[carmenjonze]

Where did anyone claim the border is closed.

Find the post, and link it.

Liar.

[JoeMemphis]

We can tell when a person is expressing an opinion because the poster usually posts "I think" before making a statement or the verbiage makes it obvious it's an opinion. However, when a person makes a definitive statement without the "I think" or something similar then that statement is being portrayed as being accurate.


Opinions are one thing and statements of fact are another. If a person claims a statement to be factual and refuses to provide support then they are shutting down the discussion on this discussion board. There's a reason they refuse to provide a link and it's because they lying or they playing a game, like glenn does, which adds nothing to the discussion.

I generally assume that unless you state that something is factual, it’s your opinion. I assume you are giving me an opinion on a discussion board. But that’s just me. I’m an accountant. I give opinions all the time. I’m very careful before I start attesting to “facts”. I’ve been around far too long and I know that most of what you hear from people are their opinions and the accuracy of those opinions may differ wildly even when based on the same set of facts. It’s kinda like the whole discussion about whether the border is closed or inflation is transitory.

If you have an issue with Glenn, you will have to address it with him. I don’t speak for Glenn anymore than I speak for you.

[carmenjonze]

You know my bank has guards and has limited access but during the week and normal business hours despite those facts, it’s open. It’s a matter of opinion I suppose but I would never claim our border is closed. Far from it. Thousands of people cross the border everyday in places other than check points. If you want to call that closed or controlled, that’s up to you. I might have a different point of reference.

Please highlight any posts where anyone here claimed the border is closed.

As for inflation and whether or not it’s transitory. I never made that claim. That’s a term used by this administration. IMO, they meant to convey that it was in their opinion short lived. They have since abandoned that term for the most part as the public IMO has a different perspective. Whose to blame. Covid, Putin. No doubt are factors. Government policy is also a factor IMO. Transitory or not, I doubt things are going to improve to any great degree by November and fair or unfair, the current administration will get blamed.

Where has anyone here said inflation is transitory?

That's your claim. Back it up or retract it.

Otherwise you're only proving the premise of this thread correct.

Soon, you'll abandon it when you can't stand the challenge (you already are unequipped for challenges from me.)

[carmenjonze]

I’m very careful before I start attesting to “facts”.

Every single post you make is an assertion of your opinion as if it's a fact.

When asked to source your information, you double down, then disappear.

You guys do this because you have no integrity and the morals and ethics of the viruses your party's leaders spread.

[gounion]

I generally assume that unless you state that something is factual, it’s your opinion. I assume you are giving me an opinion on a discussion board. But that’s just me. I’m an accountant. I give opinions all the time. I’m very careful before I start attesting to “facts”. I’ve been around far too long and I know that most of what you hear from people are their opinions and the accuracy of those opinions may differ wildly even when based on the same set of facts. It’s kinda like the whole discussion about whether the border is closed or inflation is transitory.

If you have an issue with Glenn, you will have to address it with him. I don’t speak for Glenn anymore than I speak for you.

All you do is play a childish passive/aggressive game. You're too gutless to actually take a stand on anything.

[ProfX]

I don’t know that I would try to “close” the border.

Then, like me, you don't want a "closed" border. /thread?

(Aside from the fact, that, yes, we both agree it both is not, and never has been, "closed".)

I think control is a better word and I cannot remember a time when we truly controlled the border.

It's 2000 miles long, Joe. You can build fences, walls, ... turrets? People on foot are going to cross, regardless of who's in the Oval Office. I like to call this a matter of what is known as "reality". To be terribly honest, what worries me most is how many die along the way, from dehydration in the heat and other problems. That's the true tragedy. I also don't like those who become victims of human traffickers. Those are real problems.

Now. Here's where we get to the next point. How much does it bother me that people without proper immigration documents are crossing it? Well, I get law and order and everything must be enforced, but that illegal act is a misdemeanor. That people are doing it searching for a better life for themselves and their children I do not consider a "crisis".

Never have I said we should have no Border Patrol. However, like other law enforcement, they too must follow internal rules and procedures for their agency.

I'm most worried about criminals, terrorists, and human traffickers, AFA who I would focus on stopping. People in search of a better life for themselves and their families, not so much.

[JoeMemphis]

Then, like me, you don't want a "closed" border. /thread?

(Aside from the fact, that, yes, we both agree it both is not, and never has been, "closed".)



It's 2000 miles long, Joe. You can build fences, walls, ... turrets? People on foot are going to cross, regardless of who's in the Oval Office. I like to call this a matter of what is known as "reality".

Now. Here's where we get to the next point. How much does it bother me that people without proper immigration documents are crossing it? Well, I get law and order and everything must be enforced, but that illegal act is a misdemeanor. That people are doing it searching for a better life for themselves and their children I do not consider a "crisis".

Never have I said we should have no Border Patrol. However, like other law enforcement, they too must follow internal rules and procedures for their agency.

I'm most worried about criminals, terrorists, and human traffickers, AFA who I would focus on stopping. People in search of a better life for themselves and their families, not so much.

I’m guessing this is going to continue to be an issue. What bothers you and to what degree may not be the same for everybody. That’s what elections are all about. I don’t see where a border we cannot control and laws we either cannot enforce or choose not to enforce is in anyones best interest. It become quite fashionable to ignore federal law. That is until the laws we care about happen to get ignored. Good to know we can ignore the ones that don’t bother us.

[gounion]

I’m guessing this is going to continue to be an issue. What bothers you and to what degree may not be the same for everybody. That’s what elections are all about. I don’t see where a border we cannot control and laws we either cannot enforce or choose not to enforce is in anyones best interest. It become quite fashionable to ignore federal law. That is until the laws we care about happen to get ignored. Good to know we can ignore the ones that don’t bother us.

Hell, the GOP wants to secede from the USA, and that's the folks you're voting for.

Let's be clear, here's the bottom line problem on immigration: Corporate America exploits the cheap labor from Mexico, closing American factories and moving them south. But they also love that cheap labor here in America, so they hire those undocumented people here in America instead of Americans. As long as they hire undocumented workers, those workers are going to cross the border, no matter what.

But instead of dealing with the problem at the root, it's FAR better for you to attack the undocumented workers, screaming about "illegals" in yet another racist line of attack that manufactures a lot of outrage.

[ProfX]

Good to know we can ignore the ones that don’t bother us.

I know this is how you perceive what I just said, Joe, but is not what I said.

I did NOT say the border does not need to be controlled. I did not say immigration law should be ignored. I did, however, express my priorities over what we need to control foremost. After all, if I didn't want border law enforced, I would say shut down the border patrol ... but I didn't say that. Now did I?

As you say, we do not have to agree.

It does puzzle me, if one is truly incensed about illegal immigration, why there is so much focus on people who cross the border on foot, when many undocumented immigrants come to this country by boat or plane. But I digress.

[Number6]

Hell, the GOP wants to secede from the USA, and that's the folks you're voting for.

Let's be clear, here's the bottom line problem on immigration: Corporate America exploits the cheap labor from Mexico, closing American factories and moving them south. But they also love that cheap labor here in America, so they hire those undocumented people here in America instead of Americans. As long as they hire undocumented workers, those workers are going to cross the border, no matter what.

But instead of dealing with the problem at the root, it's FAR better for you to attack the undocumented workers, screaming about "illegals" in yet another racist line of attack that manufactures a lot of outrage.

republicans target those who don't have the resources or the power to fight back.

[JoeMemphis]

I know this is how you perceive what I just said, Joe, but is not what I said.

I did NOT say the border does not need to be controlled. I did not say immigration law should be ignored. I did, however, express my priorities over what we need to control foremost. After all, if I didn't want border law enforced, I would say shut down the border patrol ... but I didn't say that. Now did I?

As you say, we do not have to agree.

It does puzzle me, if one is truly incensed about illegal immigration, why there is so much focus on people who cross the border on foot, when many undocumented immigrants come to this country by boat or plane. But I digress.

Truly incensed? You make me laugh.

For the record. I make no distinction between enforcing the law at the border or at the airport. Never have.

We don’t have to agree.

[gounion]

Truly incensed? You make me laugh.

For the record. I make no distinction between enforcing the law at the border or at the airport. Never have.

We don’t have to agree.

How about enforcing immigration law with the corporations that hire undocumented workers? You know, jail time for those employers that knowingly hire them?

Because it’s a demand-side problem. If there were no jobs for undocumented workers, then they wouldn’t cross the border. Cheaper than militarizing the border.

[JoeMemphis]

How about enforcing immigration law with the corporations that hire undocumented workers? You know, jail time for those employers that knowingly hire them?

Because it’s a demand-side problem. If there were no jobs for undocumented workers, then they wouldn’t cross the border. Cheaper than militarizing the border.

As I posted earlier, I don’t have an issue with enforcing the law. There are laws on the books regarding the employment of undocumented individuals. If you are onboard with enforcing immigration laws then count me in. If we are only talking about selective enforcement then that represents no change at all.

[Bludogdem]

As I posted earlier, I don’t have an issue with enforcing the law. There are laws on the books regarding the employment of undocumented individuals. If you are onboard with enforcing immigration laws then count me in. If we are only talking about selective enforcement then that represents no change at all.

There’s been a long standing blind eye to enforcing Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) since it was signed into law in 1986. You’re federal government at (or more accurately not) work

[ProfX]

Thought question.



If they are doing the work Americans admit they don't want to do (even Republicans), .... who's going to do it?

See you out in the fields picking lettuce and tomatoes.

If I were emperor, I'd say pay agricultural farmworkers a living wage (this is the largest sector for undocumented), and this situation might shift a bit, but ... I'm not, and no one seems willing to talk to the growers about this.

But let's be honest. Even if wages were better and the growers stopped spraying poison on their workers etc. and there were better working conditions, ... everybody's willing to bend over 8 back-breaking hours to pick produce ... yes?

If not ... ? Maybe we're lucky folks from Mexico and Central America will.

Robots might do most of this in the future ... but not yet.

[carmenjonze]

I’m guessing this is going to continue to be an issue. What bothers you and to what degree may not be the same for everybody. That’s what elections are all about. I don’t see where a border we cannot control and laws we either cannot enforce or choose not to enforce is in anyones best interest. It become quite fashionable to ignore federal law. That is until the laws we care about happen to get ignored. Good to know we can ignore the ones that don’t bother us.

Truly incensed? You make me laugh.

For the record. I make no distinction between enforcing the law at the border or at the airport. Never have.

We don’t have to agree.

?

I’m guessing this is going to continue to be an issue. What bothers you and to what degree may not be the same for everybody. That’s what elections are all about. I don’t see where a border we cannot control and laws we either cannot enforce or choose not to enforce is in anyones best interest. It become quite fashionable to ignore federal law. That is until the laws we care about happen to get ignored. Good to know we can ignore the ones that don’t bother us.

All this stupid, snivelling blather, and you still have not produced any post where anyone here has claimed we have closed borders.

Where did anyone say so?

Liar.

[Libertas]

It's confusing, I know.

Cons dont want immigrants here unless they can own them, and use them as servants, etc. Or as long as they work in the fields and get paid nothing, etc.

[gounion]

There’s been a long standing blind eye to enforcing Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) since it was signed into law in 1986. You’re federal government at (or more accurately not) work

It's the corporations making sure the government turns a blind eye so they can have their cheap labor to undercut American workers. You should see the money Tyson gives to politicians of all stripes.

I remember when there was a big meatpacking area of town in Wichita when I was a boy. It was smelly, but it was all unionized and those workers who did that dirty job could all make decent livings.

But then they busted the unions, and moved the meatpacking out to western Kansas where it's been done non-union and almost exclusively by undocumented labor.

Which is just how you conservatives love it.

[Libertas]

It's the corporations making sure the government turns a blind eye so they can have their cheap labor to undercut American workers. You should see the money Tyson gives to politicians of all stripes.

I remember when there was a big meatpacking area of town in Wichita when I was a boy. It was smelly, but it was all unionized and those workers who did that dirty job could all make decent livings.

But then they busted the unions, and moved the meatpacking out to western Kansas where it's been done non-union and almost exclusively by undocumented labor.

Which is just how you conservatives love it.

Few things give a con a bigger thrill than seeing unions destroyed and working people put in their place.

[carmenjonze]

It's confusing, I know.

Cons dont want immigrants here unless they can own them, and use them as servants, etc. Or as long as they work in the fields and get paid nothing, etc.

The only reason they begrudgingly let Chinese and Japanese people even come here at all was because they got their slavedriver asses kicked over outright slavery.

That nevertheless stopped them from treating Asian peoples as less than human, just like they do everyone else, even their own family members. :problem:

Forget second-class citizenship. They removed citizenship rights from Asian Americans over and over again, just over the course of a few decades. We had to stop them from doing that, too.

[Libertas]

https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1539 ... Rik2ceHmlQ

On Nicole Wallace
@DrJasonJohnson
says the level of rage he's heard from Black people after the Moss testimony is something he hasn't heard since George Floyd.

Yup. Can confirm. Jason speaks for me (also cause I got bumped )

The FBI calls and advises you to leave your house for safety because the president put your life in danger. Everything is wrong with this.

https://twitter.com/NotHoodlum/status/1 ... fzaNPMrLXw

The sitting President of the United States defamed, harassed, and ruined the life of an innocent woman and low-paid election worker who was just trying to participate in our democracy. Because he couldn’t handle losing an election.

https://twitter.com/NoLieWithBTC/status ... aOLlAbeAhg


All these fucking cons here support this.

[Toonces]

There’s been a long standing blind eye to enforcing Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) since it was signed into law in 1986. You’re federal government at (or more accurately not) work

The government seems to consistently do things that benefit business at the expense of everything else.