KH: I Have Been There.

Lester: No you Haven’t

KH: Yes We Have!!!

Lester: No, you have not

KH: OK, I haven’t been to Either!!!

—————

uhhhh, wtf was that?

The administration is focusing on the root causes in the origin countries

and that is the right answer

What does going to the border accomplish...policy wise...?

This is the game THEY play

When she does go...they’ll move the goalposts to some other irrelevant point

She’s working on the cause of the issue, not a symptom.

the delivery of that speech was trash

and the interview with Lester where he asked if she has been to the boarder and she lied about it.

Why lie? Just say no and tell them why instead of tripling down on it and then saying “well, I haven’t been to europe so what is your point?”

The point is she wasn’t prepared and she didn’t look good. I want her to look good. I want her to come across like she is on point and she fell short.

"We" as in administration officials.

You are falling for the GOP outrage machine.

she said we have been and when pressed she admitted she hasn’t and that “we plan to go to the boarder”

she lied dude and she didn’t have to.

after the exchange she ends with...

“I haven’t been to Europe, what l is your point?”

and why is it always falling for the GOP trap when our politicians fuck up? If Pence went down there and gave the same speech we would roast his ass because we fucked up their country and then have the nerve to tell them: “Do not comel

Even your own recollection of it is changing. Before it was she said "I" went to the border (a lie). But now you admit she never said that.

what part of this is the lie?

“You haven’t been to the border,” Holt retorted.

“And I haven’t been to Europe,” Harris replied, laughing.


you are trying but nah.. she goes back and forth using I and then changing it to we

but Lester doubled down and says YOU which is when she admits she hasn’t been.

and please don’t say We means boarder patrol. She knew wtf he as asking.

Here is the video. https://twitter.com/i/status/1402224936136187907

The relevant part starts at 4:33. Not one time in it does she say or imply that she personally has visited. That is just GOP spin that you've somehow fallen for

lmao...

I haven’t visited or heard any GOP talking points.

The wife showed me the video and I came to my own conclusion.

Yall need to stop blaming the GOP every time a Dem fucks up.

Because somehow you heard something she didn't say lol

I attributed the mistake to the GOP because your conclusion matches their headlines. But maybe you just heard wrong *shrug*

you just got your cape on..

and I dont

I... the royal we, you know, the editorial... I dropped off the money, exactly as per... Look, man I've got certain information alright? Certain things have come to light, and uh, ya know, has it ever occurred to you, that uh, instead of uh, you know running around, uh uh, blaming me, given the nature of all this new shit, you know it, it it, this could be a uh, a lot more uh, uh, uh, uh, complex, I mean it's not just, it might not be, just such a simple, uh... you know?

The idea that a Sen from CA has never been to the border...yeah, I find that hard to believe

https://www.kpbs.org/news/2018/jun/22/senator-kamala-harris-visits-san-diego-immigration/

So was it a lie...or are the goal posts being moved to...not as VP

?

Thinking back on the Naomi post

IMO what's being overlooked is this style of journalism

The question is not looking for a resolution to the problem

It's a gotcha question...and Lester has his viral moment now

What would be added to resolving the issue if she went to the border?

Immigration been a problem for the US for +20 years

...but we're not talking about the problem, or how to fix it...

We're stuck on...but Kamala ain't go to the wall!!!

It's a talking point that doesn't add anything to fixing the problem

Lester pulled a fast one on her?

so you concede that she has in fact been to the border

My issue with the gotcha question...is it doesn't add anything to the discussion

He asked the question in the first minute of the interview

Why double down?

and even though you may be unaware, it absolutely has been a GOP talking point since Biden tasked her with the assignment

I hope you can see the difference between a benign question like what periodicals do you read to stay in tune with current issues...vs...why haven't you visited the Trump wall yet?

c'mon man

...I'm sure Faux News is having a field day with Lester's moment...

And you know good and well if she went to the Border, they'd just criticize her for the photo op

...but she ain't do $hit...

F that noise

its like if you worked in a warehouse and then 3 years later you are VP of the company and in charge of fixing the warehouse issues

“have you been to the warehouse?”

the fact that she followed up that she “plans on going to the border” gives the impression she knew what he was asking.

and I’m sorry but once you are VP this is part of the gig. When you are put in charge of the border go down and see wtf has changed or hasn’t changed the last 2 years.

yall acting like she had to drive in a rented Pinto to get down there.

but why do you keep bringing up Faux News? lmao.. this isn’t about Fox, its about Kamala. If she went for the photo opt and they criticized it, then it makes THEM look bad. Not going and then flubbing the answer makes HER look bad and Lester wasn’t on some Fox News shit either. It was a softball question and she whiffed

did you bring enough context to share with the class mr. legs?

my bad, I thought everyone knew about this since it was her first real appearance and it didn’t go well over well.

https://atlantablackstar.com/2021/06/08/kamala-harris-central-america-trip-becomes-a-borderline-problem-after-her-remarks-in-guatemala-sit-down-with-lester-holt-i-dont-understand-the-point-youre-making/

Holt circled back to the issue of a visit to the border a second time, asking “Do you have any plans to visit the border?”

“I, at some point, you know, it, we are going to the border. We have been to the border,” Harris said. “This whole thing about the border, we’ve been to the border. We’ve been to the border.”

“You haven’t been to the border,” Holt retorted.

“And I haven’t been to Europe,” Harris replied, laughing. “I don’t understand the point that you’re making. I’m not discounting the importance of the border,” she said, before adding that she visited Guatemala because she’s dealing with the “root causes” of immigration.

The premise that you need to physically visit someplace to handle issues related to that place is wrong. Especially in the 21st century.

What is gained by going to the border and doing some photo-ops in a windbreaker? She doesn't need to physically go there to understand what's going on.

Lester said: “What they do see at their own border is children being lowered over fences. Children coming over with phone number stenciled on their hands. And so the question has come up … why not visit the border? Why not see what Americans are seeing in this crisis?”

Is that really what she's going to see if she visits the border? Cmon.

but thinks its not necessary to see the border as VP in charge of the border?

nigga whut???

no, this is part of the job. Go down, see the harsh conditions and what people are willing to do to get into this country..

that is part of the gotdamn job pimpin’

Is this a Qanon site now? What the fuck is dude going hard about?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"There is much temptation to use what has worked before,
even when it may exceed its effective scope."

"Roll me further bitch"

This will do.

What's up with her? I think we all had this idea she was going to be a lot more visible and vocal under Biden but haven't really seen that.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

Putting that awkwardness with Lester Neal aside, I'd think Biden was trying to undermine her future by assigning her to the border. Did she volunteer for this?

The only lasting fix for the undocumented migrant situation is making Central and South American countries more prosperous so people want to stay home. And she doesn't have the power or the time to do that so people are going to keep coming to some degree. I dunno how she'll be able to spin this as a win in 24.

This is the kind of thing VP's in the past would work on privately while they're publicly leading things like curing cancer or Covid.

I mean, I don't think curing cancer is any easier.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

it was a simple question

have you been to the boarder yet?

just say no and why you haven’t been yet. But real talk.. you prolly should go to the boarder if you are put in charge of it. Its a photo opt but that is part of the gig.

and it also makes me wonder how they are addressing kids at the boarder. You can’t just ignore that shit and go to countries and tell them to stop coming. Its one of the things that I loathe about politics. One side is shitty on immigration and dems and progressives lose are minds over that shit, then Dems get back in charge and folks shrug and talk about how hard of a job it is..

>I mean, I don't think curing cancer is any easier.
>

That's a medical issue that a politician can't really solve... but it sure looks nice to say that you're going to try.

The border, however, is a political issue that can't be solved in short term without alot of risk. Amnesty, open the boarder, close the border... she's opening herself up to L's with any of those choices and almost no potential for a W.

I'm not wedded to her as the next Democratic nominee but it seems like a bad political move to be the country's face on this issue.

On the other hand, who cares? She's aligned her entire life in pursuit of immense power over people's lives and now she has it. Heat. Kitchen. Etc.

It's telling that the very thought of her saying something genuinely brave like "we owe it to people whose countries we've hollowed out to provide a safe place for the refugees created by that exploitation" is laughably impossible. Of the traits required for an ascent to high elected office, bravery and honesty aren't really priorities.

at least I’m not.

Maybe they thought since she was the daughter of 2 immigrants she could show more empathy while speaking on it?

For me tho, like you said.. she wanted the gig so prep for the questions instead of coming off tone def when pressed.

>For me tho, like you said.. she wanted the gig so prep for the
>questions instead of coming off tone def when pressed.

Her job here was to say "we're going to do the same old shit" but in a way that sounded thoughtful and humane. She failed at it.

There's not a lot that's actually important going on here ("here" in the sense of "at a press event") but none of it is a good sign for her political career.

fucking flew down there to tell them not to come here


Let someone on here start a post telling people not to come to America for a better opportunity and watch these same people go ham. smh

She's a hoping a kinder gentler 'fuck you' to asylum seekers will do the trick, but really there's no win for her here.

She didn't handle that speech or her interview in a way that makes me think we're going to try and do the right thing here. It's been mentioned before, but so many of the root causes of the dysfunction leading to refugees seeking asylum can be connected w a direct line to US involvement and manipulation of governments in central and south america. To the poor people who have been affected though, our disingenuous message is always 'go home and clean up your own mess!'

>She didn't handle that speech or her interview in a way that
>makes me think we're going to try and do the right thing here.


this too

It's so fucking insulting to go to Guatemala and be like "hey, we know we fucked up your country, and made your region damn near unlivable, but don't bring your ass north"

Man, fuck you. Imagine being the child of not one, but TWO immigrant parents saying that shit.

>It's so fucking insulting to go to Guatemala and be like
>"hey, we know we fucked up your country, and made your region
>damn near unlivable, but don't bring your ass north"
>
>Man, fuck you. Imagine being the child of not one, but TWO
>immigrant parents saying that shit.

Tell people exactly where they need to stand and what to say!

There's always the Republican party for you!!

>It's so fucking insulting to go to Guatemala and be like "hey, we know we fucked up your country, and made your region damn near unlivable, but don't bring your ass north"

>Man, fuck you. Imagine being the child of not one, but TWO immigrant parents saying that shit.

>It's so fucking insulting to go to Guatemala and be like
>"hey, we know we fucked up your country, and made your region
>damn near unlivable, but don't bring your ass north"

The problem with this completely anodyne observation is that we either don't know anything about our own post-war foreign policy OR pretend that completely accessible information that's been part of the historical record for decades about what the CIA did in that part of the world is a conspiracy theory. Guatemalans may be insulted. We're just over here picking eating our own boogers.

She didn't have to leave Washington to find the "root causes". This was all for show. Just a bunch of photo ops to say that she's doing something, and skating through her vice-presidency just to claim her firsts.

She can't just go ahead and say that, but all the talk about "root causes" can't possibly be bad faith hand waving since we already know that, because Donald Trump is out of office, the executive branch is good and honest now.

So all of those Guatemalans can just hold their horses while we do exit interviews and negotiate severance packages with the guys who trained paramilitary forces to torture and disappear farmers and teachers who accidentally spoke the words "land" and "reform" in succession. Shit's gonna take time, and it's not like seeking asylum is a human right that just anybody can request.

the GOP is literally, right now, trying to delegitimize free and fair elections, prevent as many people as possible from voting (especially poor black folks), make dissent/protest about it damn near illegal, prevent public schools from teaching anything about racism and white supremacy to ensure the next generation is as ignorant and racist as they are, give themselves the power to overturn any election and make it so democrats never win anything again

and THIS is what you want to talk about?

*eyeroll* fuck outta her w/this colonized bullshit.

d

"But rest assured, in my luxurious house built on the backs of people darker than me, I am sipping fine scotch and scoffing at how stupid you are." - bshelly

its not possible to talk about more than one thing at a time on OKP

You could’ve made that post but you didn’t.

its surface level distraction when shit is circling the drain

>its not possible to talk about more than one thing at a time
>on OKP

of course it is..for me. but you? you stay talking about the same surface dumb shit. so take your own advice

>You could’ve made that post but you didn’t.
>
also true. i will when i get in the right headspace to bring it to fruition. i'm not there right now.

d


"But rest assured, in my luxurious house built on the backs of people darker than me, I am sipping fine scotch and scoffing at how stupid you are." - bshelly

didnt even read the rest of your post since you claim it to isn’t worth your time


good luck in the film festival

i hate you

>good luck in the film festival
>
>i hate you

"Don't Come Here" is tough and disappointing to hear from the Dems.


What is even more disappointing though? Is that the Dem party seems absolutely unable and/or unwilling to address the very issue you raise.


Shit is scary. And sad. And infuriating.

instead of engaging the topic at hand. We got the bandwidth to discuss both topics.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

Asylum seekers by law need to come to America to have their cases
processed, so saying “don’t come here” is too universal of a statement.
She was trying to address the dangers that are involved with trying to cross
the border, but immigrants don’t need to be told the obvious, and it comes
off as condescending, and that’s the way it was perceived. So that was a fumble
on her part.

Her mission is to identify what is forcing or causing people to
desperately leave Central American countries, and to work with Central
Americans governments on developing a plan to combat it.

She has to realize that this a very sensitive plight, and she is going to be under
a huge microscope of the media and the GOP.

However, she will be okay. It was just a slight verbal misstep, and keep in mind,
the Biden administration is trying to clean up the immigration mess that Trump
created..... So let’s not lose focus here.

for president post lol...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDaA_KFHeB4

democratic vote genius

Until we realized MAGA west would probably pull more from Trump.


Really though, its Fuck Ye all day. Still.

split the Dem vote.. lmao.

2nd highest GE win margin the last 6 elections

The media made it look close for ratings on election night but the actual vote totals weren’t close.

Trump won Michigan by 10K votes.. Biden won by 154K

Trump won PA by 44K, Biden won by 85K

and there was never a way DEM voters would pick Ye over Biden. People who vote for Ye vote write in or stay home. Only troll voters vote for someone like that.

But this is mostly on-brand for her *shrug*

The one policy-related plus I saw in her VP selection was I thought she might be a good influence on Biden in terms of migration policy. But aside from the country-cap removal for employment-based immigration that she helped pass the senate before she left - which btw overwhelmingly benefits Indian nationals at the expense of immigrants from other countries:

https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/world/kamala-harris-promises-to-lift-existing-per-country-caps-for-employment-based-green-cards/article29960309.ece

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/international-business/us-senate-passes-s-386-bill-eliminates-country-cap-for-employment-based-green-cards/articleshow/79545374.cms

- she's clearly flip-flopped on all her "progressive" migration talk too.



You're not a Republican for side-eyeing any or all of her fucked up statements. I mean come on lol:


"Not gonna sit here and say Imma do something that's only gonna benefit Black people, noo!" (re: reparations):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KKn0gP6CZU

"No I don't think America is a racist country" (following Republican Tim Scott's speech saying the exact same thing):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pzcCF9Nx3c

"Don't come" (re: asylum seekers from Central America, and at odds with the UN Declaration of Human Rights and Geneva convention):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpGitFIzamQ

Not to mention her historically right wing stance on Israel-Palestinian relations:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/radical-left-try-again-on-israel-vp-elect-harris-may-be-to-right-of-biden/

Whatever. I don't even trip about her anymore. Okp didn't like me pointing out she'd likely be little more than a vanity pick mouthpiece for Biden's most racially-sensitive bullshit, and yet here we are.

when she was out here sounding like Fox News on some “America has 2 words: Don’t come!”

but I know.. she went to an HBCU and the questions Lester asked were so hard.


smh.. this place sure has changed.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/harris-false-claim-border-visit

Headline: Harris falsely claims 'we've been to the border' when pressed on lack of visit

and that is the problem with you okp political niggas

if Fox News said it then I must change my view on it?

of all the niggas on okp you should know better than this.

and you actually went to fox news to find a link and posted it here? lmao

grow a pair nigga

Fox News: Parrots the same wrong thing you said
You: haha you went and got evidence


I watch Fox News. I didn't need to search for it. I seent it lol.

You shouldn't change your view because Fox News said it. You should change your view because your view is wrong. Documented as being wrong. She didn't say what you (and Fox News) claim she said.

Fox News ain't going to change because that's their agenda. Frame her as a liar for Fox News reasons. You though...*shrug*

That's much more concerning lol

but we don’t want to talk about that..

lets blame it on Fox News!

NBC and NPR to hear the fall out and frustration of her interview answer overshadowing her trip.

Fox didnt make this up.. it happened. Of course Fox is going to go in on it

and I dont give a fuuuuuck about yall caping for her shitty handling of that easy ass interview question.

When politicians fuck up, I talk about it. Dont care if there is an R or a D next to their name.

it doesn't mean the criticism is invalidated. And really your main defense is letting her off of some technicality of grammar. She said 'we went' when asked if she went - which implies she was part of 'we'. Technically not a lie, but she was being deceptive and had to walk that back when pushed and asked the question again.

But hey 'Fox News Talking Point'. Fuck a fox news, though.

her answer when Lester pressed her on it.

but its easier to hide behind Fox News headlines then address the actual shit show we watched with her speech and interview.

I mean, we know Fox News loves to editorialize... so rather than put the situation in the proper perspective, they're gonna focus on the "man on the street" angle of whether you can trust what this politician has to say because of this embarrassing situation.

Fox News has an agenda to push but it doesn't mean because you recognize that she got a little slick with her answer that you're a part of the same agenda.

to see folks just absolutely refuse to critique a democrat.

"Do not com here" is essentially the Trump/Pence message. Not sure why it is so much more acceptable to come from Kamala than those bozos.

but its on brand for voters in 2021.

Any criticism is viewed as a weapon that can be used by the other side.

sometimes you have to call dems out when they misstep, it doesn’t make one a GOP or Fox News fan to do so.

and to prop up a bLaCk WoMaN like that to parrot that bull$hit was just...I dont know.


this politics tho. She's playing the gaaaaaaame

what you though???

He's somewhere on a QAnon blog talking about, "we've won the war of ideas."

This was such a tone-deaf, sad, and callous statement coming from Kamala - but it's also not surprising. Very on-brand.

-->

Holding Kamala to any type of ethical standard is sexist and racist.


What do you have to say for yourself.

https://tenor.com/MLUz.gif

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5dxMmfM2_4

I'm talking about the original post. That KH lied about going to the border.

https://youtu.be/omrMRP15q9M?t=233

and he says yes because they put gas in it 3 years ago when they used it.

then screaming: “AND I DIDNT GET AN OIL CHANGE EITHER? WHAT IS YOUR POINT?”

that isn’t lying.. lol.

And contribute to the growing humanitarian crisis on the border.

I needed this. I got into a disagreement with my father this morning while
giving him a ride to the airport.

I needed this.. thank you, sir.

who the pres literally put in charge of leading the admin's management of this crisis.

What's even the rationale behind open discouragement as a policy?? "Do not come"... because it would make her job easier? That's like the admin adopting a policy of discouraging Black people from getting pregnant instead of focusing on the systemic issues driving disproportionately high Black maternal mortality.

Furthermore, the question of whether she's even empowered to encourage or discourage asylum seekers to migrate was settled long ago when the US voted for and/or signed and/or ratified the relevant resolutions, conventions, and protocols enshrining asylum-seekers' rights and the responsibilities of any countries who receive them. Right of Asylum is a fundamental protection we're all afforded by international human rights law.

So even a counterfactual defense is not favorable to KH here. What would help stem the flow is effective management of the crisis both domestically and abroad, not some baseless decree.

Do you expect her to go rogue?

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2021/4/1/22359917/biden-border-mixed-messaging-crisis

"Her statement is consistent with the Biden administration’s stance from the outset that the border is “not open” and that migrants should not come in an “irregular fashion,” despite the fact that many migrants from the region have legitimate, legal claims to asylum or other forms of humanitarian protection. The US continues to turn away the vast majority of arriving migrants under Title 42 of the Public Health Safety Act, with exceptions for unaccompanied children, some families with young children, and people who were sent back to Mexico to wait for their court hearings in the US.

The White House amplified that messaging with more than 17,000 radio ads in Brazil, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras between January and late March. The ads played in Spanish, Portuguese, and six Indigenous languages, reaching an estimated 15 million people. There have also been ad campaigns on Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube, including one that features a Salvadoran who made the dangerous journey north in 2010 at age 19 and was eventually deported after arriving in Texas."

this place really has changed

a statement that reflects the administration’s position on the
current immigration predicament. She is just simply relaying
that message, while Biden, the incumbent president, avoids
handling the situation himself.

Biden has given her the task of addressing immigration and
voting rights issue, possibly the two biggest issues on the
administration’s to-do list. It’s like she was handed 2 grenades
with no pin in them.

Some media outlets sense that she is being setup to fail. So if
the administration is unsuccessful in controlling the border, then the
blame will fall on how Kamala handled the situation. Plus this gives
the GOP and other opponents future ammunition to use against Kamala
If she decides to run for president in 2024.

The Vice Presidency is a complementary position to the president, with a
a focus on addressing minor to semi-major national and foreign affairs, and
to implement and practice the policies of the President. The President usually
tackles the most serious and most important issues himself with the Vice President
in tow.

I previously stated that she fumbled the situation by making that statement.
However, I didn’t blame her or condemn her, because I know she is simply
reciting what the administration wants. And I personally feel she was given
the assignment to be the fall girl if the Biden administration fails to clean up the
the situation.

Translation: Don’t shoot the Messenger!

as well as her speech and interview

the optics suck

you expect to hear that kinda shxt ('...don't come here...') from white men, white men with power.

Not from a member of one of, if not 'THE most HISTORICALLY disenfranchised sectors of the American population'

who she 'is'

what she's 'supposed to be'/represent.

the projected expectations - akin to excepting Obama to come save nxggas...

it's all there all over again. You're making perfect sense, but the dissonance surrounding it is so loud. LOL

she did the old ladder tug

For the VP to go rogue from the admins position.

How things actually work is secondary to how we feel about the issue

just goes to show people who claimed to be for open borders will change their stance depending on who delivers the speech.

>just goes to show people who claimed to be for open borders
>will change their stance depending on who delivers the speech.

the people who screamed against the wall

the people who push back when we discussed illegal immigration

but maybe all those people left okp and everyone is more conservative when it comes to the boarder these days.

I would do a search for the threads on this topic but I’m lazy

The trump hate was just theater. They agree on most policies.

but after the W? smh..

Some would say it's a Fox News talking point.

categorize any criticism of cruel or shitty immigration policy as a call for open borders and challenge them to defend that position

its fair to point out criticisms being inconsistent from trump to biden, but I don't remember many if any people here asking for open borders

I will have to learn the search function on here because I remember immigration debates with people bashing the idea of sending people back who crossed “illegally”

but I will admit my stance on the boarder was softened partially due to conversations on OKP.

and now this place is like “yeah.. tell them not to come, she’s right!”

wait, whet?

people should be able to do the same. It might also make the US think harder about the crises we create in other countries. Ethically and morally, how can you ship jobs and resources out of a country, then tell people they're not allowed to follow?

As a practical matter, we've complicated it way beyond that, and we've created such a twisted framework that the US probably can't have open borders without creating much more serious complications.

The original post isn't about that. It's that Kamala was out there pushing a speech that could have been written for or by donald trump, and told people not to come here, which technically we're not allowed to tell asylum seekers under international law. She also had a super shady response to being asked about her visit to the border.

>
>As a practical matter, we've complicated it way beyond that,
>and we've created such a twisted framework that the US
>probably can't have open borders without creating much more
>serious complications.

>As a practical matter, we've complicated it way beyond that,
>and we've created such a twisted framework that the US
>probably can't have open borders without creating much more
>serious complications.

Looks like we're going to have to start unraveling the United States.

It's a revolution... LOL!

The United States isn't special.

>The United States isn't special.

Policy that guaranteed humane treatment of immigrants - legal and non-legal.
I'd love it if there was any kind of accountability and oversight of ICE
I'd accept an immigrant detention policy that wasn't influenced and crafted by privately held detention centers, who's entire business model is based on filling up said detention centers
I'd accept us accepting and following internationally agreed upon asylum laws.
I'd appreciate it if we didn't keep building Trumps dumb border wall and taking people's land on imminent domain laws.


There's a lot of room for improvement between where we're at and unraveling US imperialism.

Somehow, all of those things seem just as politically likely in the short term as balkanization of the US, but it would be a delight to be surprised. Over a timeline that is measured in decades rather than election cycles, I think Balkanization is more likely.

Either way, political violence is an "is" not an "ought" or "ought not" so if anybody in a position of power actually wants that stuff, they should probably get going before things get any uglier.

I actually tried to edit, saw the "edit" option available, but took too long to type my edits that the period expired. I don't think that's ever happened to me before.

Anyhow, edit: Maybe another way to put this is that whatever crisis that immigration is presenting is only about to get more and more urgent pretty soon, and it just seems to me that, increasingly, our options are:

a)brutality
b)doing nothing that inevitably slides toward brutality

If it comes to what will happen first, that the United States will be able to help the victims of American imperialism in a humane way or that the United States will no longer be an institution that exists (at least in the way that it does now) then I imagine that the second comes first.

It doesn't seem like the kind of problem that we are interested in or capable of solving.

If we go the balkanaziation route, i'll keep the passport updated so I can still get my SoCal AND NorCal burritos.

When someone is interested in migrating, looking into the rules of the destination country/countries and figuring out a plan is a big part of the process *shrug* I'm not against countries having and enforcing rules, as long as processes are reasonable, fair, accessible... and not steeped in racism, ethnic and religious discrimination, and/or abuse and disregard of human rights.

But even the most immigrant-friendly country is going to encounter problems or folks slipping through the cracks. So I just think countries that are popular migrant destinations bear a visible responsibility to adhere to international laws and standards and, essentially, lead by example in their response to those challenges.

ESPECIALLY former imperial projects founded via colonization, with long histories of settlement by various groups and complex national identities. Closed borders make little sense to me in this context bc the democracies have basically been set up from jump to be these evolving/fluid experiments of diversity. So (effectively managed) migration is likely vital to the success and longevity of such states. Imho anyway. I just think fighting it, or even overplaying one's hand in trying to curate it, would be a doomed endeavour.

edit: when I say democracies like the US or Canada were set up from jump as fluid experiments of diversity, I don't mean to downplay how disenfranchised Indigenous and Black populations were during the countries' foundings. More like, the diversity was present whether White settlers regarded them as fellow citizens or not. The state had to catch up to reality.

Clear, commonly accepted borders between nation states are a pretty recent phenomenon in human history. We had something before we agreed on them as an organizing principle, and we'll have something after they stop being useful.

The thing we should be afraid of isn't open borders or border abolition. It's that our attention to them as some kind of fundamental and necessary way of organizing humanity will keep us from realizing that the next thing is already coming and we won't be prepared for it or have a voice in it.

Even Ocasio-Cortez says we need to have a secure border and that entrants need to be documented.

What most people are against is the inhumane treatment of people at the border, and the treatment of undocumented people currently inside the country. This is what Ted Cruz, Trump, and Fox News calls "support for open borders"

I’m surprised how many people in here agree with her speech

this place has changed

immigrants to give. You'll be hearing it for years. There is a space between going rogue and being the spokesperson for that sort of rhetoric.





**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

I know she has a job to do but I expected her to have more compassion and a better delivery.

That delivery was cold af

Context as to why that is (imho):


<1. Did you know that those Northern Triangle countries (El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala) aren't even countries the majority of people seeking asylum in the US come from? It's actually China lol (according to most recent pre-COVID DHS data from FY2019 analyzed by MPI):

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/SPT-2021-tab2-asylee--.png

and only a few hundred more Guatemalan nationals than Indian nationals sought asylum in the US in FY2019, according to that data. Indian and Chinese nationals account for almost 90% (!) of H-1B petitions as well:

https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/data/h-1b-petitions-by-gender-country-of-birth-fy2019.pdf

Did Kamala ever make a similar "Do Not Come" plea to Indian or Chinese nationals? Why are people from El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala being singled out as this face of 'undesired migration' (for lack of a better term) when it's actually other nationals driving up the majority of petitions?



<2. There's quite a bit of racism embedded in US migration management. The general paradigm is more or less:


*Immigrants from predominantly White/European and (select) Asian countries are highly favored (https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/tourism-visit/visa-waiver-program.html);

*Immigrants from Middle Eastern and Northern African countries OR those not from the region but using arabic names (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/american-citizens-u-s-border-agents-can-search-your-cellphone-n732746) or other signifiers commonly associated with a muslim identity, like headcoverings (http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/12/29/sikh-americans-not-muslims-but-suffer-islamophobia.html) are scrutinized like current/future terrorists and/or having terrorist connections;

*Immigrants from predominantly Black countries aka shitholes are a nuisance but easier to exclude (eg. by refusing higher percentages of their visa applications: https://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/Statistics/Non-Immigrant-Statistics/RefusalRates/FY19.pdf) since most can't walk/bus to America like some Latin American immigrants can;

*Immigrants from Latin America are stereotyped as illegal/irregular regardless of whether that's true, such as in this case since asylum-seekers are not illegal/irregular migrants.


How this racism plays out in policy is, for example, majority White/Euro-identifying Latin American countries like:

*Chile (over 60% White/Euro-identifying: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Chile#Ancestry_and_ethnic_structure)

*Argentina (almost 90% White/Euro-identifying: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_of_Argentina),

*and Uruguay (almost 90% White/Euro-identifying: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Uruguay#Origins_and_ethnicity)

getting designated part of the Visa Waiver Program, giving its nationals access to the various privileges/exemptions associated with that status (although tbf Argentina and Uruguay had their VWP status revoked in the early 2000s for excessive overstays lol), while nationals of predominantly non-white/Euro-identifying Latin American countries (eg. Brazil, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras as outlined in your article) get all kinds of villification and a "Do Not Come" campaign like the one in question. The postures towards majority White/Euro countries and majority non-White/Euro countries are like night and day, even within the same region.



<3. The people the admin is telling not to come are most likely asylum-seekers, literally the one class of immigrants allowed to "come"(unless the circumstances/destabilization driving them out changes). Asylum claims have to be filed upon arrival at a Port of Entry or from within the country one is applying to, it's not like they can just apply from where they are. The logistics of applying for asylum highlight the most glaringly stupid and racist aspects of this "Do not come" campaign.


So, essentially, the paradigm favoring White and Asian immigrants and "discouraging"/restricting Black and Brown immigrants remains the same btwn the Biden-Harris admin and Trump's, it's just that instead of forced sterilizations and family separations the Dems are running well-produced psyops. On matters of migration and foreign policy they're friendly Republicans.



And re: KH specifically, for me it's not about expecting her to go rogue but this being yet another example of her craven two-faced flip-flopping. I think my resentment stems from the fact that it's already SO HARD for Black people, Immigrants, etc to have true advocates in US gov and it literally disgusts me how she'll throw on her little Howard sweatshirt and do all the fake "I'm for the people-hey sista friend-that little girl was me-Daca Daca Daca-Yeah immigrants" bs to win elections/political appointments, only to antagonize the very same vulnerable communities she claimed to be standing up for (eg. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/kamala-harris-truancy-arrests-2020-progressive-prosecutor_n_5c995789e4b0f7bfa1b57d2e , https://prospect.org/justice/how-kamala-harris-fought-to-keep-nonviolent-prisoners-locked-up/ , https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Judge-rips-Harris-office-for-hiding-problems-3263797.php , https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2019/06/26/clergy-abuse-survivors-question-sen-kamala-harris-record/) when in office. She's just this... vessel that says and does whatever.



>Do you expect her to go rogue?
>

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

like buddy said below. She isn’t good when she is presented with questions that aren’t scripted.

sometimes I get a “how dare you ask me questions in an interview” vibe from her.

>like buddy said below. She isn’t good when she is presented
>with questions that aren’t scripted.
>
>sometimes I get a “how dare you ask me questions in an
>interview” vibe from her.


It's that same vibe all of the old dems have.. she's not progressive or new school at all..

legitimately terrible at it.
Unfortunately, her politics are pretty shit as well

She killed at the debates because she had a good scripted plan. Same reason she does well at hearings.

When she is asked questions, she should be prepared for but isn't, we get answers like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsB6EWNUcyY


I can't forget my cousin telling me about when she came to speak to the Deltas in New Orleans. My cousin said she landed with a thud in a room that should have been her base.

She kills it online fans, but her IRL track record is shakey.



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

when she doesn’t have the answer or is trying to buy time

Yeah, she isn’t good at this.. or maybe Obama was so good he makes everyone else look bad at giving interviews.

Black folk really have a hard time saying they will help Black folk. I know why but damn.. still sad to see

Not OK:

Her blackness
Her Proir relationship Relationships (i.e., Willie Brown and accusing her of sleeping her way to the top)
Theres just something about her (i.e., internalized mysogny or misognor)

OK and fair game:

Things she says
Policies she supports

Tossup Issues:

She's a cop. This is a tough one and a bit more complex because I generally hate people hating on black people in law enforcement because I think we need more Black cops and prosecutors despite KRS. Her record as a prosecutor in my opinion is a mixed bag of some very progressive stuff and also some not so progressive stuff. If you want to talk about that record I am game but not interested in the general, "she's a cop" argument.



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

things you cant question Kamala on and (why):

what she says (Fox Nooooz talking point)
what she does (Fox Nooooz talking point)

>Tossup Issues:
>
>She's a cop. This is a tough one and a bit more complex
>because I generally hate people hating on black people in law
>enforcement because I think we need more Black cops and
>prosecutors despite KRS. Her record as a prosecutor in my
>opinion is a mixed bag of some very progressive stuff and also
>some not so progressive stuff. If you want to talk about that
>record I am game but not interested in the general, "she's a
>cop" argument.


I hate on Eric Adams being a cop but mostly it's that he has alternated his stance and story on so many important points that I believe he will do anything for personal gain

I don't think Miley Wiley can take on the Police Union or a GOP Candidate who runs a fear based campaign who paints Maya as soft on crime and defund the police.


I think he talks general election talk now but I think
a former cop is in the best position to take on the police union and talk crime reform in general against a republican candidate.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

And there is zero threat from Mateo and Sliwa as the Republican candidate. Those guys are beyond ridiculous. Why worry about talking crime reform on their level? The real battle here is moderate dem vs. progressive.

Adams did more for the real estate lobby as borough president than even De blasio as mayor. He straight up lies too much. Reversing his course, saying he didn't mean something he said pretty clearly. And the NY Post endorses him. What kind of police reform and accountability is feasible with him as mayor really? I applaud his work for 100BILEWC but if the issue is who is going to police the police other than the police themselves, I would think we need to approach police reform from a third party perspective. (Btw that story about the dominican cop getting raped a ton of times by other officers and her not getting any justice after internal review just drives this home)

Maya is my first choice, followed by Stringer then Garcia. I'm not voting for any of these other clowns.

I understand Wiley is heavy on rhetoric and light on substance but she's the only feasible progressive candidate.

black senators, we need black women senators. and the black woman in the back looking in at the dinner- made my stomach turn.


https://twitter.com/SenCortezMasto/status/1405181175912615936/photo/1

https://twitter.com/SenStabenow/status/1404971055383449604/photo/2

>black senators, we need black women senators. and the black
>woman in the back looking in at the dinner- made my stomach
>turn.
>
>
>https://twitter.com/SenCortezMasto/status/1405181175912615936/photo/1
>
>https://twitter.com/SenStabenow/status/1404971055383449604/photo/2

for florida senate seat. i hope she gets it, but i have a feeling she might not get it, hope i'm wrong.


https://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/history/h_multi_sections_and_teasers/Photo_Exhibit_African_American_Senators.htm

speech writers
supreme court justices
judges
etc

brief, I cant help but smile and be mesmerized. A real dark-skinned black man. not a mix one <--- no shade. but a black man with every military branch under his command. whew!

yes we need more black leadership in every position now more than ever.

is also found - in general - in progressive/liberal circles. That is: there's a misconception that if you criticize a Democrat - that you're by default strengthening Republican talking point/influence. However, I'd argue that constructive criticism of Democrats is essential to strengthening not just Democratic politics, but liberalism/progressivism en masse (that is, if we actually believe in progressive/liberal values).

Where things have gotten muddy is when you have commentary from disaffected lefties who despise the Democratic party (sometimes with good reason) - who then focus all of their energy tearing down Democrats while simultaneously giving Republicans a pass. There a myriad of Youtub'ers who do this (Kim Iversen is one) - who rarely had/have a bad word to say about Trump, but take every opportunity they can to trash Biden. They will singularly focus on how awful Pelosi is - while saying little (if anything) about how toxic Mitch McConnell is.

Here - I think it's rightly assumed that the vast majority of OKPs are liberal and/or progressive - so our discussion should be on cleaning up our own house - per se - and being reflexively defensive about every single Democrat (just because they are Democrats) does little to advance any meaningful progress with a Democratic party that badly needs reform.

The GOP is an abomination. Strengthening its opposition is critical - but we can't do that if we give a pass to trash policies and speeches simply because it's from our perceived team.
-->

but its really odd seeing Dems on here circle the wagons anytime someone is criticized. That is some GOP shit… or so I thought.

I get circling the wagons and being afraid of our words being weaponized in public settings but on here? meh..

we should be able to have a back and forth without accusing people of Fox News talking points