Just like your orange Dear Leader.
I’ll let you have the last word. 
The US has never had any officials with a formal title including czar. However, it is a frequently used term for assignments and Kamala Harris was widely called the “border czar” by the administration and mainstream media. She was tasked with fixing problems on the border. The repeated assertion that she was not the border czar is a deflection for her failure to fix the problems she was tasked with fixing. It’s trying to win on semantics when you can’t win on substance.
I think it’s an important distinction so the scope of her directive is not assumed to be broader than it was. Czar implies a much wider scope of action, than “addressing the root causes”.
Addressing the root cause of a problem typically implies taking a long time, not seeing immediate results,but is a more permanent, lasting fix, etc. We are finally seeing reduced levels of migrants… is that due to Kamalas efforts addressing the "root causes’ in Central America, or something else? Probably, as with most things, a combination of factors.
As I said, you’re redirecting to a discussion about semantics of what “czar” (a completely unofficial term) means, rather than a discussion of whether or not the Biden-Harris administration has done a good job on the border.
Harris was assigned to fix the border. Until two months ago, the entire media was using the term border czar. Nobody was complaining and trying to split hairs about how she wasn’t really the border czar because she was only supposed to fix the root causes and not actually solve the border crisis itself.
There is even the rather famous clip of her being asked why she hasn’t been to the border. She didn’t take the opportunity to explain that she was focused on solving root problems rather than addressing the border directly. She just lied that she’d been to the border, then said she was going to go to the border. Why didn’t she just communicate clearly on the issue if it was so clear?
That’s fair, this is the important part after all.
Illegal immigration decreased every year 2007-2019. It rose from 2020 to 2023, and in 2024 it has apparently fallen dramatically (at least so far).
So, realistically trump is responsible for an increase, and Biden/Harris are responsible too. Do you trust the (very) recent downward trend under Harris to continue, or do you think that is an aberration and trumps heavyhanded approach is warranted?
Do you have human/American rights concerns about rounding up millions of illegal immigrants for forced deportation? Innocent citizens caught up, racial profiling, economic impact of lost workers, etc? That seems like a very messy, logistically complicated undertaking rife with possible lawsuits from American citizens.
They aren’t US citizens. They go bye-bye.
1 Like
What the hell does human/American rights even mean?
The thought of this puts a smile on my face.
In this context, innocent is unnecessary. If you are a citizen you can only be innocent.
Workers, many of whom, don’t pay taxes but get the benefits tax payers pay for. They are a huge net drain on the economy. The progressives like to mention how many billions illegals pay in taxes but leave out that it all goes back to illegals in the form of welfare. Not only that, it doesn’t even cover the costs of welfare and other benefits they, in my opinion, steal. And even if they all wanted to work, and they all don’t and are more than happy to live in shitty communities collecting welfare, there just aren’t as many jobs for uneducated and unskilled workers as there used to be back in 1900.
Seems like there would be quite a few cases of mistaken identity/mistaken detainment, racial profiling issues, etc. most people don’t walk around with citizenship papers on them, and do we really want a task force asking everyone they seem suspicious to show them their papers? This is the part I am most curious about- how will it all be implemented without infringing on the rights of American citizens in the process?
I haven’t seen the numbers so Idk about net economic impact. But for a few years, when meat processing, produce, service industry, and labor/construction industries suddenly lose a significant portion of their workforce, there will be a significant economic impact.
It seems like you’re the one racially profiling. Besides, in these sanctuary cities, they know who the illegals are, otherwise, how would they know who to give benefits to or where to house them? They release illegals who have been arrested. These people are not living clandestine lives.
They can’t hire people who are legally here?
2 Likes
If it’s that simple, great. But when the directive goes out, I’d assume folks wont be as easy to find as you make it out to be. They’ll be moving to friends and families places quickly. And then it becomes a hunt, and ICE will have a lawsuit on their hands Everytime they accidentally detain the legal cousin instead of the illegal.
There are already large work shortages with illegals filling those jobs. That’ll just get worse. And I don’t see out of work citizens running to fill those backbreaking, low paying jobs, in rural areas.
Maybe they should start.
That seems like much more of a their problem than a my problem.
Like in what world do people get to do something illegal, create a massive problem, then everybody else has to tip toe through the tulips to not hurt feelings and make nice-nice?
1 Like
That will make it easier to find them but the truth is, most of them aren’t too bright and couldn’t survive without government handouts.
Money talks, bullshit walks.
Only way KamalalalaDingDong turns this around is if she kicks Trump’s ass in the debate tomorrow. If she does, then I am wrong about her, and she deserves to win…
2 Likes
Betting odds seemed to have changed overnight. Still too close to call IMO.
I think it’s a small blip in Harris’ favor that will regress to meaning nothing within a week. We’ll see if there are any catchy soundbites that either side can glean from the debate that do damage, but absent that I don’t think it really moved the needle.