Border walls are no longer racist

[EyeballKid]

It’s really bizarre that most of the people who post on this board don’t see the “bipartisan bill” for what it was - a desperate attempt to finally take action (after 3 years of inaction) on the border crisis, and remove the Biden/Harris administration’s biggest weakness from being an issue in the 2024 election. It was all politics. Just as the Republicans killing the bill in an election year was also all politics.

Any long-term solution is going to need congressional action.

Congress didn’t act under Trump or under several previous admins.

Congress acted under Biden to put a comprehensive compromise on the table.

Trump shot it down.

 

[TarSpiel]

It’s really bizarre that most of the people who post on this board don’t see the “bipartisan bill” for what it was - a desperate attempt to finally take action (after 3 years of inaction) on the border crisis, and remove the Biden/Harris administration’s biggest weakness from being an issue in the 2024 election. It was all politics. Just as the Republicans killing the bill in an election year was also all politics.

While there may be some truth to this, it doesn't really change the fact that Trump is a racist MFer, and so are a lot of the nitwits who think he's the second coming of Jesus Christ.

 

[CallMeTyler]

Imagine the Republican party spent so much time developing the bipartisan bill, claiming it was the most extensive border security legislation proposed in decades, and Trump scuttles it.

Then MAGA claims it was a weak bill and didn’t actually address the issues (they obviously didn’t read it).

These aren’t serious people. Let’s all agree to stop engaging Croa and HY and this board will be better for it.

 

[lightbluenc]

It’s really bizarre that most of the people who post on this board don’t see the “bipartisan bill” for what it was - a desperate attempt to finally take action (after 3 years of inaction) on the border crisis, and remove the Biden/Harris administration’s biggest weakness from being an issue in the 2024 election. It was all politics. Just as the Republicans killing the bill in an election year was also all politics.

If a Republican president said he'd sign a medicare for all bill, I can 100% guaran-damn-tee you no Democratic congress nor Dem running for office would say no to passing it.

 

[rodoheel]

It’s really bizarre that most of the people who post on this board don’t see the “bipartisan bill” for what it was - a desperate attempt to finally take action (after 3 years of inaction) on the border crisis, and remove the Biden/Harris administration’s biggest weakness from being an issue in the 2024 election. It was all politics. Just as the Republicans killing the bill in an election year was also all politics.

Do you think the bipartisan bill would have helped the situation at the border? If not, why not?

 

[CFordUNC]

It’s really bizarre that most of the people who post on this board don’t see the “bipartisan bill” for what it was - a desperate attempt to finally take action (after 3 years of inaction) on the border crisis, and remove the Biden/Harris administration’s biggest weakness from being an issue in the 2024 election. It was all politics. Just as the Republicans killing the bill in an election year was also all politics.

The bill was created by Jim Lankford, one of the most conservative members of the Senate representing one of the most conservative states in the Union. Not seeing how that qualifies as a "desperate attempt to finally take action on the border crisis" unless you think that extremely Republican Jim Lankford representing even more extremely Republican Oklahoma was trying to help Joe Biden win re-election.

 

[Icky Mettle]

If these walls could talk, would they say racist things? If so, they are probably racist walls.

 

[CFordUNC]

You can sell that horseshit to someone else; I’m not buying. That weak bill was nothing more than a last minute ploy by the administration to show some sort of action/enforcement/interest in the border in an election year. After, three years of utter incompetence. Please. And if this was such a truly “bipartisan” bill, it would have flown through the Senate. Quite frankly, I’m surprised the feckless R’s didn’t help pass it; that would’ve been par for the course for those dumbasses.

Besides, if you never thought border walls were racist in the first place, my poasts weren’t addressing you.

Speaking of trying to sell horseshit. So your contention is that the creator of the immigration reform and border security bill, the extremely Republican Jim Lankford representing even more extremely Republican Oklahoma, was trying to help Joe Biden win re-election? Is that what you're trying to say?

 

[SnoopRob]

Can someone help me with who Croatan was on the ZZLP?

I have a feeling that information will assist me to put this thread in context.

 

[Icky Mettle]

So first of all, the original post is pretty straightforwardly a classic trolling attempt. You made no real attempt to discuss the article you were posting (if you even read it), to give your own opinion on it, or to solicit other people's opinions on it. Instead, you used a snarky, rage-baiting title that posits a strawman position and was meant to antagonize, not to seek discussion or debate. Then, in this follow-up post, you made clear that this post is just some sort of gotcha based on the fact that you were supposedly told years ago that you were racist because of something something border wall. In other words, this is just some vague airing of grievances in which you apparently expect us to remember verbatim, take responsibility for, and apologize for unidentified posts by unidentified posters made years ago. How exactly are we supposed to do that?

Second, you are misconstruing (probably unintentionally) the intersection of "racist" and "border wall." Trump's 2016 stump speeches railing on the border wall were typical dog-whistling meant to stoke simmering racist, nativist, and anti-immigrant sentiment and drive white voters to the polls based on fear and hate (it worked!). That doesn't mean everyone who supports a border wall is racist, or that the wall itself is racist, but it does mean that the border wall (as the icon of Trump's immigration policy collectively) became a rallying cry for people looking for an acceptable way to express racist and/or anti-immigrant sentiment that was not considered socially acceptable to voice out loud. In that sense it's much the same as Fox News' periodic fearmongering about a MIGRANT CARAVAN or the people (including Trump) who describe the border situation by calling it an INVASION (both of which are transparently ridiculous).

if you have any thoughts on the bipartisan border bill or Harris's position, feel free to actually post them for discussion. But the idea that Harris now supports Trump's border wall is silly - the bipartisan border bill calls for a fraction of the funding and a fraction of the scope of Trump's inane idea to line the entire southern border with a wall.

Your second paragraph nails it. No, building a wall at certain locations along the border where it may deter people from illegally crossing the border is not necessarily racist. But let’s not mince words here. Trump making “building a wall” along the US/Mexico border the primary focus of his campaign was very obviously born out of and intended to appeal to racist, anti-immigrant, and xenophobic sentiment.

 

[Croatoan]

Speaking of trying to sell horseshit. So your contention is that the creator of the immigration reform and border security bill, the extremely Republican Jim Lankford representing even more extremely Republican Oklahoma, was trying to help Joe Biden win re-election? Is that what you're trying to say?

Did Lankford vote for the bill?

 

[ChileG]

You can sell that horseshit to someone else; I’m not buying. That weak bill was nothing more than a last minute ploy by the administration to show some sort of action/enforcement/interest in the border in an election year. After, three years of utter incompetence. Please. And if this was such a truly “bipartisan” bill, it would have flown through the Senate. Quite frankly, I’m surprised the feckless R’s didn’t help pass it; that would’ve been par for the course for those dumbasses.

Besides, if you never thought border walls were racist in the first place, my poasts weren’t addressing you.

What about the border bill was weak? What would you change about it? What is Trump’s plan and why do you support it?

 

[ChileG]

It’s really bizarre that most of the people who post on this board don’t see the “bipartisan bill” for what it was - a desperate attempt to finally take action (after 3 years of inaction) on the border crisis, and remove the Biden/Harris administration’s biggest weakness from being an issue in the 2024 election. It was all politics. Just as the Republicans killing the bill in an election year was also all politics.

Who cares why it was done? It was a bill supported by both parties and Trump killed it because the GOP is made up of MAGA sycophants.
You are voting for a guy who would hurt the USA for his own personal benefit. That is what is truly bizarre.

 

[CFordUNC]

Did Lankford vote for the bill?

You already know the answer to that, and you already know the answer to why. So is your next contention that Jim Lankford spent four months working across the aisle at his own career peril, crafting the best immigration reform and border security bill that has been brought before Congress in decades, just for shits and giggles?

 

[Kraftyheel89]

I do not recall anyone (or many as you attest) claiming the border wall was racist. If they did, that was pretty dumb and unnecessary. The idea of a border wall (high and beautiful as Trump promised) across the entire southern border is just ridiculous on it's own. Over or through all the waterways, nearly a thousand miles? Stupid and silly concept. And Mexico never paid for the few hundred miles where Trump replaced old fencing.

I do, however, recall Trump labeling all undocumented, asylum seekers, and those that sneak in being evil lawbreakers, murderers, drug cartels and terrorists from shithole countries, and poisoning the blood of America as EXTREMELY racist and feeding the white nationalist movement.

The huge improvement (first in decades) would have been passing the bi-partisan bill. Congress FINALLY acted, which is where this should be handled. And Trump once again put himself over country, because he knew it was one of his biggest winning bitchfest priorities come election season.

 

[Croatoan]

You already know the answer to that, and you already know the answer to why. So is your next contention that Jim Lankford spent four months working across the aisle at his own career peril, crafting the best immigration reform and border security bill that has been brought before Congress in decades, just for shits and giggles?

I make no contention about Lankford other than he wasted a lot of time on a bill that was not supported by the majority of his constituents.

 

[Croatoan]

I do not recall anyone (or many as you attest) claiming the border wall was racist.

 

[lightbluenc]

I make no contention about Lankford other than he wasted a lot of time on a bill that was not supported by the majority of his constituents.

So if Trump was president Republicans wouldn't have voted on and passed this bill for Trump to sign. Got it.

 

[CFordUNC]

I make no contention about Lankford other than he wasted a lot of time on a bill that was not supported by the majority of his constituents.

We are getting so close. I have high hopes for this conversation, yet!

Now, why do you think that Jim Lankford spent four months leading the effort in crafting such a strong border security bill that was not supported by the majority of his constituents?

 

[hedge]

As someone who has contunuously supported the construction of a wall as a part of efforts to increase control of illegal immigration, I’d be interested in hearing from those who have made that argument in the past. Do they hide behind the “it’s just a compromise” nonsense, have they changed their opinions on the issue, or are they okay with just a little racism in order to pick up a few votes?

Labeling a potential discussant's view on a topic as "nonsense" (and, later, "horseshit") before they've even had an opportunity to put it forward doesn't seem like a way to begin a good faith discussion...