• PizzaMan
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    We have. Secure the border.

    You guys shot that down, because preventing Biden from having a win was more important.

    You guys pretty much admitted the panic over the border is not a priority, that it’s overblown. It’s just political theater.

    Repeal the NFA. Go hard on crime. Voter ID. Outlaw Abortion (Among some of us, we arent a monolith) Outlaw Puberty Blockers (Again, among some).

    Those are restrictions/undoing things, not actually building anything. Nor do they actually help people.

    Parental rights

    That’s some PR bullshit. All you guys are doing is outing LGBTQ youth, and destroying public education all under the guise of parental rights.

    EVs (Among some)

    What do you mean EVs?

    Enshrine the right to repair.

    https://www.coloradopols.com/diary/187908/republicans-celebrate-right-to-repair-that-they-opposed

    Hell, even culture war shit

    Culture war bullshit is not an example of the GOP building something up to help the average American. If you think that was a good example, no wonder the GOP never gets anything real done.

    • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      9 months ago

      You guys shot that down, because preventing Biden from having a win was more important.

      Just parroting the line doesn’t make it true. The bill was shot down because it was fucking abysmal and wouldn’t actually accomplish anything. It was the bare minimum democrats had to do to try and shift the blame for problems they caused and refuse to fix. Not an actual solution.

      • PizzaMan
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        The bill was shot down because it was fucking abysmal and wouldn’t actually accomplish anything.

        Right. Republicans were demanding it go through until the moment Trump said it was bad. But it was actually the result of it not accomplishing enough. /s

        Quit fooling yourself.

        • jimbolauski
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          Up until a week ago nobody knew what was in it, dems were only releasing bullet points. Once people read it they opposed it.

            • jimbolauski
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              9 months ago

              You can read it for yourself and make your own decisions rather than relying on people who hate America to interpret it for you.

              Don’t worry I won’t rely on you to interpret it for me.

              The 4,000 number that triggers a border close doesn’t close it, it only gives the option to close it.

              (A) DISCRETIONARY ACTIVATION.—The Secretary may activate the border emergency authority if, during a period of 7 consecutive calendar days, there is an average of 4,000 or more aliens who are encountered each day.

              Then there’s the 5000 trigger but naturally there are exceptions.

              © An unaccompanied alien child. (D) An alien who an immigration officer determines, with the approval of a supervisory immigration officer, should be excepted from the border emergency authority based on the totality of the circumstances … (F) An alien who has a valid visa or other lawful permission to enter the United States, including— … (iv) an alien who presents at a port of entry pursuant to a process approved by the Secretary to allow for safe and orderly entry into the United States.

              Even those loopholes were not enough so they made sure they could ignore the mandatory closing.

              Whenever the border emergency authority is activated, the Secretary shall have the authority, in the Secretary’s sole and unreviewable discretion, to summarily remove from and prohibit, in whole or in part, entry into the United States of any alien identified in subsection (a)(3) who is subject to such authority in accordance with this subsection.>

              • PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                So, just to be clear, the border should be closed even to people with who valid visas or are otherwise lawfully permitted to enter into the U.S. when the border emergency authority is activated?

                Like, if an Israeli citizen shows up and wants to get through…they should be rejected if the border emergency authority is activated?

                • jimbolauski
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Nice try at a straw man, I’m surprised you didn’t go the unaccomponied minor route.

                  • PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    You can just say no and amend what you mean.

                    How come none of you know how to argue? Pointing out a strawman just means I’ve misrepresented your position.

                    Also, the unaccompanied minor is in the bill. You posted it.

          • PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            Matter of fact, I’ll do some reading for you. You tell me if these things are bad.

            For an additional amount for ‘‘U.S. Immigration and19 Customs Enforcement—Operations and Support’’,$7,600,833,000, to remain available until September 30, 2026: Provided, That of the total amount provided under this heading in this Act, $3,230,648,000 shall be for increased custodial detention capacity, $2,548,401,000 shall be for increased removal flights and related activities, including short-term staging facilities, $534,682,000 shall be for hiring U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel, and $1,287,102,000 shall be for increased enrollment capabilities and related activities within the Alternatives to Detention program…

            ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES REFUGEE AND ENTRANT ASSISTANCE5 For an additional amount for ‘‘Refugee and Entrant Assistance’’, $350,000,000, to remain available until expended, for carrying out section 235©(5)(B) of the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008

            DEPARTMENT OF STATE INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS CONTROL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT For an additional amount for ‘‘International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement’’, $25,000,000, to re main available until September 30, 2025, to counter the flow of fentanyl, fentanyl precursors, and other synthetic drugs into the United States…

            SEC. 3203. INTERNAL RELOCATION. (a) IN GENERAL .—Section 208(b)(2)(A) of the Im migration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1158(b)(2)(A)) is amended—

            • (1) in clause (v), by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end;
            • (2) in clause (vi), by striking the period at the end and inserting ‘‘; or’’; and
            • (3) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(vii) there are reasonable grounds for concluding that the alien could avoid persecution by relocating to—‘‘(I) another location in the alien’s country of nationality; or‘‘(II) in the case of an alien having no nationality, another location in the alien’s country of last habitual residence.’’.

            ‘(b) BORDER EMERGENCY AUTHORITY DESCRIBED .—

            ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL .—Whenever the border emergency authority is activated, the Secretary shall have the authority, in the Secretary’s sole and unreviewable discretion, to summarily remove from and prohibit, in whole or in part, entry into the United States of any alien identified in subsection (a)(3) who is subject to such authority in accordance with this subsection.

            All of those sections can be found in the link of my other comment. So, this isn’t even interpretation, just what is exactly in the bill.

            What is here that’s worth opposing exactly?

            • ConModM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              9 months ago

              Thats not nearly all of it, thats a tiny snippet.

              • PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                Yeah, which means there’s more stuff that you’d probably find appealing in it!

                Because if you read Republican criticisms of the bill, there’s no policy discussion. It’s not bad because tens of millions isn’t enough, or because ICE wasn’t given enough power to deport immigrants in the country with authorization, or anything else. It’s just bad, just dead on arrival, just a crap sandwich. No reasoning given for why, just that it is.

                They’re abusing your trust in them to lie to you. The bill has what you want in it. It has what they want in it. So why isn’t it being passed?

                • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Yeah, which means there’s more stuff that you’d probably find appealing in it

                  Why do you automatically assume that people are supposed to agree with it by default? It’s seriously that unfathomable in your mind that someone could read it and decide it isn’t a good bill?

                  • PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    9 months ago

                    No. I hate the bill. But it also wasn’t targeted at my political demographic.

                    For a group of folks that justify war and suffering of others for personal and national security, you must like it more than I do. It’s just a matter of whether you actually like it or just think it’s okay. From what I can tell, you should actually really like it.

                    But here’s the thing: I didn’t arrive at hating the bill because I heard from AOC that it’s a bad bill. Most of you heard from freakin’ Fox News and Co. that it was bad bill and believe it.

                    Republican politicians are lying to you. The bill is a relatively good one from your perspective. But, for whatever reason, you can’t pull from the wool from over your eyes to see it for yourself.

              • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                9 months ago

                I’m genuinely curious how you look at threads like this where he does nothing except be a total fucking condescending jackass and think “yeah, it’s reasonable to have this guy deciding who’s in good faith”

    • ThrowawayOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Gop != all conservatives. Again, not a monolith.

      You guys shot that down, because preventing Biden from having a win was more important.

      That bill would have made it worse.

      What do you mean EVs?

      ElectrIc vehicles. A lot of conservatives hate them and think we shouldnt be subsidizing them.

      • PizzaMan
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        That bill would have made it worse.

        Zero explanation given, thanks. Really convincing.

        ElectrIc vehicles. A lot of conservatives hate them and think we shouldnt be subsidizing them.

        So hatred of electric vehicles makes the average american better off? What the fuck are you talking about?

        • ThrowawayOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          We webt over this in an earlier post, didnt we?

          Also Im not going to pretend to fully understand ev hate, other than when assholes chop up classics to put in an ev drivetrain. I just put it in there because its usually conservatves who do it

          • PizzaMan
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            I just put it in there because its usually conservatves who do it

            But what does it have to do with helping the average american?

              • PizzaMan
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                9 months ago

                But you’re the one who brought it up as support for the claim that conservatives are helping the average american.