Fox News

I think GOP will agree with you if you advocate that law needs to be followed. Legal activities welcomed.

 

I looks like you are OK with those who brake US law. Legal activities welcome but are you encouraging illegal activities.

If change is needed do it via legal, legislation branches.
All those who call abolish police, de-fund Police, abolish ACE etc are attacking the sovereignty and safety of the US and it citizens.

 

Peddling hate is in most cases legal in US, under 1st Amendment. Are you, or are you not, OK with YOUR political party and YOUR reference news organization promoting a neo-Nazi trope? Also, чей Крым?

 

Heck no. As stoopid as these slogans are, there is absolutely nothing wrong with advocating a set of priorities and policy choices. 1st Amendment, bro. Also, yeah, if current deportation wing of ICE gets abolished, by God that'd not be the worst thing. A country existed until 2002 without it, and can again.

 

You are inventing things as you go.
And mixing issues, are you sober when you are typing?
The Christian worship event wasn't neo-nazi, with all the controversy.
But when masked in black armed man appeared there and started the violence, the police didn't intervene because thanks to your representatives and the abuse of the police whole last year.
As to what legal, all I'm saying US has laws and all that is needed is to uphold these laws.

 

The badge and gun attacking citizens is also an issue, but I then to believe that most Police are doing their job as required and there are some that don't.
Next time when someone calls the police after all the abuse they faced and the resignations good luck seeing one.

Training and accountability is what needed.
Or going back to wild west, people are being shot every were daily and now its on a rise even more.
Let the bipartisan congress and senate address this issue, it will be major issue for 2022 and 2024.

 

Before ICE there was another name of the agency, they did the same. All that is needed is respect the US Law.
Are you for open borders or for legal immigration?
I'm for reforms in this area and humane approach to all migrants.
Not demonizing the people who are hopping to come here for the better future.
So advocating a set of priorities is fine, I don't see any issue with that.
Pass laws and enforce them just like any country does.

 

No there wasn't. The agency was created to use 9/11 to redefine immigrants as a "homeland security threat". There's enough issues with its tactics over the years to justify some people's calls to just disband it and start over. Which is all "abolish ICE" means; disband a controversial federal department and give its functions back where they were before.

Again, supporting legal immigration, humane approach to migrants, and not demonizing people are all planks in the Democratic Party platform. Trump, for one, attacked and fear mongered about every single major stream of legal immigration: family, work-based, refugee, and Diversity Visa. These are about all the ways a person can immigrate legally. He didn't stop with rhetoric, too: that little snake Steve Miller was the only guy in his inner circle with any idea about how government runs, and he made sure to deal as much damage to legal immigration as he could.
And BTW: not a single person in mainstream US politics advocates open borders. Least of all, Joe Biden.

 

Dude, you brought up Newt and his "replacement" rhetoric. He thinks that is what Faux News consumers like you want. So what is it? Do you share the old neo-Nazi trope or not.

As for a so-called preacher and Antifa incident that conveniently happened so Andy Ngo (whose hobby horse happens to be Antifa scare) can film it, I'll pass. I will not believe Antifa-related "news" that largely based on Ngo's "reporting".

 

Yes, but not because I support it.
Not everything I post is because I support it.
That's the issue between our exchanges, if I share some info some of you need target to attack.
Honestly I no longer remember why I posted this info.

 

ARE YOU OK WITH IT?

The shrewdest GOP politician of the 1990ies thinks he needs to go full Nazi to stay relevant with your crowd. And since it doesn't seem to repel even people of your background, he appears to be right.

Here is an actual scholar using the term "White Identity politics". I think it's a polite way to say "fascist".
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-the-rise-of-white-identity-politics-explains-the-fight-over-critical-race-theory/

 

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/fox-lost-control-monster-created-073500364.html

 

Stanislav,
You missed the part when I stated that posting the good, the bad and ugly.

 

She was referring to illegal immigration. Do not try to illegally cross the border into the USA. Part of the problem is that the human smugglers tell people the lie that they will get their customers across the border into the USA and then they can stay in the United States. They say these kind of things to get people to pay them. Kamala Harris was just telling the people the truth.

 

In other words, contrary to Trump's lie, Democrats do NOT believe in open borders.

 

Exactly.
Moreover, as a legal immigrant, I know which one of the two parties I prefer. Which is not to say Biden/Harris actions on immigration so fare are anywhere near perfect. Compared to 45 and his little sneaky white supremacist Stevie Miller, though, even lousy Democrat is a huge improvement.

I would like Lerner to tell me if, in his opinion, the late Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) was among those "pushing open border policies". I obviously do not know his immigration history, but loads of exUSSR immigrants roughly contemporary to himself got asylum under an amendment he introduced (open for Jews, Evangelical Christians, Ukrainian Greek Catholics, and catacomb Christians historically persecuted in USSR). Still in force, BTW. After Trump blocked refugees from Middle East, Ukraine suddenly emerged as #1 source of asylee/refugee immigrants. Even though Ukraine no longer discriminates against UGCC, Baptists, Pentecostals, Jews, or autocephalous Orthodox. Open borders much?

 

The asylum program for legal immigration is still running. If you think the #'s and the demography should be increased you work with your elected officials to enable this to happen legally.
As far as I know many of my neighbors Soviet immigrant applied, waited in line, and legally were granted the refuge status and later their green cards and eventually US citizenship.

As to temporary ban from countries that among their immigrants some perform terrorist acts, It was done first for the safety of the Americans.
There is plenty of domestic terrorism why import even more?
One who read Quran understands that while Muslims are guided not to be friends with Christians and Jews, it advocates in other verses to be kind to those who show kindness to them (Muslims) even if those are non Muslims but believers in God.
So yes some are questioning ideology.

Again, I think the point that as late Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), is it was an act that legally enabled many immigrants to make US their home.
Same as in the Reagan era the Amnesty allowed millions of immigrants from all over the world with majority being Hispanic to make US their home.
I'm 100% for the Dreamers to have a path for naturalization, majority know no other country.
I understand it will increase the pressure at the border.