US to begin denying asylum at Mexico border, Where's the Outrage?

[Deleted member 559230]

During President Trump's term he fought the liberal left to protect our borders from illegal immigrants. Now that Joe Biden, who can do no wrong, is President he's enacted basically what Trump was doing and there's not a peep from the liberal left. Where's the outrage?

https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/u...ylum-at-mexico-border-open-100-migration-hubs

 

[pustal]

Where's the outrage?

 

[JuanMena]

Watching CÑÑ by accident.
They say that the new act/law says that if you're caught trying to illegaly enter US&A you'll get immediately deported. Any other try will get you in jail.

So...

Basically an open border, you just need to try twice to get in US&A.

 

[supermist]

/Topic

 

[The Catboy]

"Liberal left" lol
Biden is barely better than Trump and literally said he was going to continue the shit Trump started. Trumpers are just dumb.

 

[Vetusomaru]

Where's the outrage?

It's ok when Democrats do it. Remember: Obama also promised to build a wall and nobody complained.

Post automatically merged: May 20, 2023

"Liberal left" lol
Biden is barely better than Trump and literally said he was going to continue the shit Trump started. Trumpers are just dumb.

Biden. Better than Trump. Are you on drugs?

 

[AndrewLB]

"Liberal left" lol
Biden is barely better than Trump and literally said he was going to continue the shit Trump started. Trumpers are just dumb.

What exactly has Biden continued that was a Trump policy? Biden completely undid every Trump border policy, not to mention Biden's DOJ and Homeland Security refuse to enforce our immigration laws that were passed by congress and signed by previous presidents. You don't get to pick and choose what laws to enforce.

 

[Flame]

Republicans or democrats. Tories or Labour. X or Y. or who ever. It is all the same shit. It's one big illusion. They all brought for the right price and been sold a long time ago.

 

[Xzi]

Republicans or democrats. Tories or Labour. X or Y. or who ever. It is all the same shit. It's one big illusion.

The consequences of allowing fascism to grow and spread, however, are very real. When a political party chooses to stand for cruelty and against basic human rights, everybody must stand in opposition to them, even those unaffiliated with any party.

 

[tabzer]

The consequences of allowing fascism to grow and spread, however, are very real. When a political party chooses to stand for cruelty and against basic human rights, everybody must stand in opposition to them, even those unaffiliated with any party.

Political parties don't "choose" anything. Can you comprehend the comment you are responding to, or are you just talking over people like you usually do?

 

[Xzi]

Political parties don't "choose" anything.

LMAO if I was as petty as you I'd be putting that quote in my signature for sure. Political parties don't choose their own policy platforms? What about elect leaders? I'm sure your social studies/civics teacher loved you.

If I'm being slightly less facetious, I can maybe interpret your statement to mean everybody within a party is an individual, but let's be real: if your preacher, your party's leaders, and the talking heads on TV are all telling you the same thing, you're probably gonna fall in line.

 

[tabzer]

LMAO if I was as petty as you I'd be putting that quote in my signature for sure. Political parties don't choose their own policy platforms? What about elect leaders? I'm sure your social studies/civics teacher loved you.

If I'm being slightly less facetious, I can maybe interpret your statement to mean everybody within a party is an individual, but let's be real: if your preacher, your party's leaders, and the talking heads on TV are all telling you the same thing, you're probably gonna fall in line.

You are looking at people in terms of parties that they benefit/support, ignoring the premise that all political parties are the same bullshit. You've never acknowledged the premise of the comment, but moved straight into your institution loving propaganda.

 

[Xzi]

You are looking at people in terms of parties that they benefit/support, ignoring the premise that all political parties are the same bullshit.

Wrong, the core of my comment is that fascism and authoritarianism must be resisted and undermined at all costs, by people of all political affiliations AND people of no political affiliation. It's not a controversial statement. The only reason you might possibly take offense to that is because you know of and/or support a current party which is slowly embracing those tenets, but if so that's an indictment solely on you and that party.

 

[tabzer]

Wrong, the core of my comment is that fascism and authoritarianism must be resisted and undermined at all costs, by people of all political affiliations AND people of no political affiliation. It's not a controversial statement. The only reason you might possibly take offense to that is because you know of and/or support a current party which is slowly embracing those tenets, but if so that's an indictment solely on you and that party.

The core of your comments suggest that people should take a stand against a political party, which cannot happen without favoring political parties. The comment you responded to basically said, "political parties suck," and your comment reads, "yeah they do, but have you thought about these political parties?"

 

[Xzi]

The core of your comments suggest that people should take a stand against a political party, which cannot happen without favoring political parties. The comment you responded to basically said, "political parties suck," and your comment reads, "yeah they do, but have you thought about these political parties?"

Fascism doesn't belong to any one party, but any party that embraces it, in part or in whole, must be crushed. You don't have to embrace a contrasting political party, or any party at all, to be part of that resistance. Simple concept.

 

[tabzer]

Fascism doesn't belong to any one party, but any party that embraces it, in part or in whole, must be crushed. You don't have to embrace a contrasting political party, or any party at all, to be part of that resistance. Simple concept.

The point that undermines your argument is that it isn't a "political party". The system that determines the terms of "political party" itself is bought and paid for. You keep elevating their status in response to comments that plainly criticize them. You show no comprehension of the conversation.

 

[Xzi]

The point that undermines your argument is that it isn't a "political party". The system that determines the terms of "political party" itself is bought and paid for.

If we're referring to the US specifically, maybe, but the ideologies of fascism and authoritarianism existed before this country was founded.

You keep elevating their status in response to comments that plainly criticize them.

Incorrect again. You're making the conscious choice to interpret my criticisms of a given party as an endorsement of another, but I'm not even thinking within the confines of a two-party system here. I don't need to present a contrasting option in order to say, "this thing is bad and anything it touches becomes bad," it's a statement that can stand all on its own.

 

[tabzer]

If we're referring to the US specifically, maybe, but the ideologies of fascism and authoritarianism existed before this country was founded.

"The consequences of allowing fascism to grow and spread, however, are very real. When a political party chooses to stand for cruelty and against basic human rights, everybody must stand in opposition to them, even those unaffiliated with any party."

It's not a "we" thing, @Xzi. You elevated political parties in this comment for some reason. Now you are bringing up the US. Not every thread is about your problems, and this isn't an organic way for the conversation to shift.

You're making the conscious choice to interpret my criticisms of a given party as an endorsement of another

You are endorsing the party system in response to a comment that criticized it.

 

[Xzi]

It's not a "we" thing, @Xzi.

My mistake then, I assumed you were speaking within the context of a two-party system because your arguments are hard to interpret outside of that context.

You are endorsing the party system in response to a comment that criticized it.

Oh I get it, you're trying to spin Flame's words into a criticism of democracy in general. I don't believe that was his intent, but I won't presume to speak for him either. Certainly the way the US and the UK have handled their own democracies has been lacking, but still vastly preferable to submitting to a dictator or king.

 

[tabzer]

My mistake then, I assumed you were speaking within the context of a two-party system because your arguments are hard to interpret outside of that context.


Oh I get it, you're trying to spin Flame's words into a criticism of democracy in general. I don't believe that was his intent, but I won't presume to speak for him either. Certainly the way the US and the UK have handled their own democracies has been lacking, but still vastly preferable to submitting to a dictator or king.

"Republicans or democrats. Tories or Labour. X or Y. or who ever. It is all the same shit. It's one big illusion. They all brought for the right price and been sold a long time ago."

Holy shit. His comment is so mysterious.