Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I think it was more likely the sticker shock of the total costs of those earmarks and riders but to each his own.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Kamala Harris major border policy speech
- Thread starter Copernicus
- Start date
You must be confusing me for someone else. Go find the post and quote it where this has been explained to me before or where I ever used the term “border czar.” This was my first time ever, so maybe you better check yourself
Makes me wonder if you actually read the article.
PureX
Veteran Member
He even SAID that he killed it, and why, publicly. Though he is now trying to deny it.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
But not Texas. Thanks for pointing out that she was notably far enough away from ground zero to pander that the border is 'under control '.
McBell
Unbound
Interesting that I am unable to find the very first one in the bill your source claims it is from...
Perhaps you can find, and point out, from the link to the bill your source provides the very first one:
- $60.06 billion in security aid for Ukraine.
And also you need to show where they GOP did not agree with it at all, even though they were going to pass it until Trump said not to because it would make Biden look good.
Of course, the whole "The GOP was going to pass it until Trump said not to" part is the part you keep ignoring.
But let us go with baby steps to get to that part.
McBell
Unbound
No, you presented where someone ELSE did your homework.
So now all you need to do is verify their work...
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I'm not going to do it. You have the information already, and I'm not playing your games.
McBell
Unbound
McBell
Unbound
Wonder all you like.
I do not post articles I have not read.
Perhaps you should reread it with understanding what is written as the main goal?
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Glad your amused.
McBell
Unbound
I just flat out said the information is not where you claimed it is.
Thus it is still on you to either show I am wrong and the information is where you claim it is or actually support your claim.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
It's not a claim nor my claim as you have been rightfully pointed out those specific earmarks and riders as reported by NPR.
You can run yourself around in circles if you want, but I've done my part.
McBell
Unbound
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Wrong. It's not a claim because people already know riders and earmarks exist in that bill , so it's not a claim at all as you claim I made it.
Sorry to burst your precious bubble as I'm just pointing out the facts. Not making any personal claims.
Copernicus
Industrial Strength Linguist
You may be right that this is the first time you've heard of, or seen, the Democratic response to the 'border czar' label that they stuck on Harris. So you have finally heard it now.
However, it is possible that your account was hacked and someone else posted this:
That was you, right?
Makes me wonder if you yourself read the article that McBell cited. It was very clear that she was never made 'border czar'. If you had read the article, you would know that she was never a 'border czar'. If anyone is, it is the head of Homeland Security, not Kamala Harris.
Copernicus
Industrial Strength Linguist
Here is why Republican Trump defenders get so confused. Their own leader pretends that he was their very own 'border czar' during the four years that he did nothing to solve the border crisis. Then he tries to refute a major policy speech from Harris, not by providing an alternative better plan to solve the crisis, but by spreading lies and disinformation:
Fact check: To attack Harris, Trump falsely describes new stats on immigrants and homicide
OK, but while that might be relevant to her ability to succeed, it isn't relevant regarding whether Kamala "will have the smarts or the courage to take on those corporate criminals and their many flunkies in her own party." You seem to be shifting your criticism to the party and not their candidate.
Also, Obamacare, which did eventually pass in a watered-down version, was a single issue. Kamala has a broad agenda in mind some of which may be stymied by her own party, but we saw Joe get his much of his broad agenda through Congress in his first two years. This is the party of Schumer, Jeffries, Schiff, Swalwell, and Raskin. It is expected that they will work with Harris. These are serious, smart, with strong track records interested in good governance.
This stuff isn't difficult to decide, but you have to use all of the evidence available to you and be willing to understand that these Republicans don't care about the border unless they are governors or senators of border states. What they care about is using the border as a wedge issue, Trump's main campaigning issue in 2016 and again in 2024.
How do we know? What did they do about it when Trump held the White House and the Republicans had majorities in both houses? Did they pass a border bill without earmarks and riders? No, because they don't care about that just as they didn't pass an infrastructure bill or produce an improved version of Obamacare. It's all talk and only talk.
And when the 60 billion to Ukraine was separated from the bill and passed separately as was aid to Israel, you didn't see the Republicans try to get the remnant passed, either.
The Republicans may have learned something about wedge issues when they had Roe overturned. What went from an issue that garnered votes became one that will cost them votes for as long as it takes to reinstate the lost reproductive rights. Likewise, if the border situation is ever resolved, they'll lose more votes even if they're the ones to fix it.
No, this is just Trump being self-serving and his sycophants licking his boots as ordered.
I remember when you said the same about Trump and his photo ops in safe places. Or maybe I don't.
When are we going to stop telling that falsehood? Kamala Harris was NEVER given that role -- as in not ever. Why do we keep saying that she was?
But “border tsar” is a contested term. Allies and former officials who worked with the vice-president say she was not given responsibility for policing the border.
“It was never that position,” said Ricardo Zuniga, the former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State of Western Hemisphere Affairs.
“She knew from the beginning, as did the entire US government, that it was about tackling migration at its source.”
13 August 2024
Will Grant, BBC
In early 2021, President Biden gave Ms Harris the unenviable brief of dealing with the “root causes” of Central American immigration. See that? Root causes -- they don't happen at the border, they happen where the migrants start from -- their home countries and states -- where gang-related violence, economic ruin and environmental disasters happen. That is, the "Northern Triangle:" Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador.
While the ultimate aim of the Harris role was to reduce the numbers of people arriving at (not crossing) the US border, Mr Biden never used the words “border tsar” in announcing her appointment. “She is the most qualified person to lead our efforts with Mexico and the Northern Triangle in stemming the movement of so many folks to our southern border,” Mr Biden said at the time.
So please be accurate and honest, and if you can find criticism of her while being accurate and honest, I promise I will listen.
Last edited: