Maybe Sanders and Warren aren’t the kinds of leaders this country is looking for.
I want to be clear: I’m not anti-Israel. I just don’t give any more of a shit about Israel than I do about any other country we do business with. I just want this country to get to the point where what happens to Israel is no more important than what happens to Japan or Argentina. But as things are today, the Israel lobby has made Israel the 51st state, and it’s probably more important than any state other than California or Texas.
If you don’t have a replacement for ICE, then you don’t want to enforce immigration law. If I call to abolish the IRS, what does that mean of my opinion of tax enforcement?
What is ICE doing wrong that can’t be corrected with simple legislation? The IRS was reformed with simple legislation.
The difference between ICE and the INS is that ICE has more resources and more power to deport people. The Abolish ICE folks don’t want to deport anyone, so this is bad. They want to go back to the old system that deported a lot fewer people. Of course, you could just pass a law exempting most undocumented immigrants from deportation, but that would take bravery.
As for OCasio-Cortez, she continues to do interviews and that’s looking like a really bad idea. Crowley is still on that ballot and he’s not coming off. He could win just by being on that ballot.
The replacement for ICE is to move it back to where it was pre-2003. Ocasio-Cortez has said that we do need border enforcement but that ICE itself needs to be revisited. So they do have a replacement for ICE and comments of “This means they want no immigration enforcement” are either misguided or disingenuous. You can disagree with how they want them enforced, etc but Lieberman was either ignorant or just lying for the sake of political hyperbole. You know, the very thing he’s supposedly fighting against.
I’m personally agnostic on the issue and think it’s a terrible election year slogan for exactly this reason (people saying “you want no enforcement!”) but Lieberman should know better.
Which means they want a LOT less enforcement, because that’s what we did pre-ICE. Immigration was considered a national security issue after 9/11 for an actual reason. Let’s have that debate. Oh wait, not a single Democrat in office is willing to actually vote to abolish ICE. So we already won.
But if you want to abolish ICE, here’s an idea: Put the IRS in charge of enforcement. They know where all the undocumented are working. They can order them all fired tomorrow. Illegal immigration, solved. Anyone on board?
Sure, if you take their claims at face value when they are challenged. Which we are not obligated to do. Most of these people oppose enforcement of immigration law in every example: workplace raids, E-verify, deportation of people with removal orders, even deportation of many felons. There is no reason to believe they support any enforcement at all.
You mean they say something and you ask them about it and they answer and you increase your understanding of their position based on their answers?
Madness!
If you can find instances of Ocasio-Cortez advocating for zero enforcement then great. If not, Lieberman is lying (or ignorant and just guessing). Making up what you think she’d answer in your head doesn’t count.
That’s not really how it works. Politicians lie when they get called out onto a limb where public opinion clearly doesn’t support their position. It’s absolutely legitimate to call them out on such dishonesty. It’s not made up, it’s simple extrapolating based on what they actually advocate. You can’t oppose every single enforcement measure existent and then claim you’re for enforcement.
Now Ocasio-Cortez, even she doesn’t know what she actually believes. She’s backed off of nearly every DSA position she’s been asked about, yet still claims to be with them. of course, she could just feel Crowley breathing down her neck. She clearly thinks he’s planning something nefarious, like daring to beat her when the actual electorate votes.
Dude… the American invasion of Iraq has brought Israel nothing but grief. People like Lieberman may claim that they did it for Israel, may even believe they did it for Israel, but Israel never wanted it. Israel may have publicly supported the Bush administration, but that’s just because supporting America is what Israel does. You’re our patron. The fact that you blame the Iraq war on Israel belies your claim that you aren’t anti-Israel.
Besides, the fact that the U.S. has a powerful pro-Israel lobby has little to do with the fact that Israel has such a disproportionate place in the American public discourse. Israel has a disproportionate place in the public discourse of *lots *of countries. I wish it weren’t the case, but for some reason, the world won’t shut up about us.
Oh really? Are you sure about that? I seem to remember a certain charismatic leader from Israel actively lobbying our Congress to take out Saddam Hussein:
Oh, and guess what? He’s doing the same now with Iran. So how many more Americans have to die fighting for causes that have little to do with American interests? How many Americans have to lose their jobs, their houses, their farms because of the economic shocks such a war would cause?
Look, you can think what you want - I honestly mean no disrespect, but we’re never allowed to say what needs to be said about Israel without the fear of being called antisemitic or anti-Israel. I completely get that not everyone in Israel agrees with Netanyahu and probably many Israelis wanted nothing to do with toppling Saddam Hussein and remaking the Middle East in the West’s image. But facts are facts, and the fact is Israel’s far right lobby has out-sized influence on American foreign policy. I’m NOT saying Israel is the only reason we invaded Iraq and have a beef with Iran. I’d blame Iran a lot, actually. But even so, there’s no denying the Israel factor.
In any case, this thread has deviated. My original point was to correct the OP and point out that Ocasio Cortez was, contrary to American dogmatic thinking, quite correct in educating people and pointing out that Israel’s occupying territories illegally under international law. People ridiculing her for saying this are in fact the very people who need to be ridiculed for their abject ignorance of anything that occurs outside of US borders. FTR, if it means anything, I completely concur that Palestine’s “leaders” (Fatah, Hamas, etc) have their own agenda and exploit civilians and refugees and are perfectly willing to sacrifice them for their own propaganda.
While I agree this thread has gone off track, I have to say that regarding Netanyahu, you’re mistaking the tail for the dog. Bibi has always been a good Republican stooge, which is one reason of many I dislike him so much. He probably made the speech he gave - as a private citizen - at the request of one of his American benefactors/sugar daddies. Bibi would probably make an intelligent, well-reasoned argument in favor of the U.S. invading Norway if a Republican asked him to. The man is the GOP’s bitch.
Israel is a useful “enemy” for politicians in Muslim countries and a useful “friend” for politicians in the United States. In both cases, their real agenda has little to actually do with Israel.
Use of obscenities has been relaxed in the Pit, but rules are still in effect in this forum. The N-word is off-limits, and the L-word should be too. I’m tempted to report the following post.
I think civility requires calling him the “L-name” or “The Despicable Turd from Connecticut formerly stinking up the Senate.” You wouldn’t pronounce his name aloud would you? Let’s not be lax with etiquette here.
I was first stunned that the Democratic Party didn’t evict the L-Turd in 2000. Recall that he ran for Vice President and Senator simultaneously, knowing that
(a) the Senate seat was safe for any Democrat—if he stood down D victory would be a sure thing,
(b) if the L-Turd won both elections he would be required to abdicate the Senate seat, and the Republican Governor, John Rowland, would appoint a Republican to serve as Senator, and
(c) the Senate was very closely divided. L-Turd’s seat was likely to be the 50th.
In the event, the Senate was divided 50-50. Had Gore and L-Turd won the big election, the GOP would have had 51 seats and been able to defeat any Gore program.
That L-Turd put personal greed ahead of the interests of country and party may not be surprising. Many P-words might act similarly. But I am especially outraged that nobody else seemed outraged by this treachery.
Holy shit she said unemployment is low “because everyone has two jobs”. This is someone who admits she is not an expert on geopolitics but is an economics major. Wow. Then she said “Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week, and can barely feed their kids.” This is an amazing display of ignorance for someone who plays up their economics background.
This is the state of economics education in the US. Good thing there are probably thousands of homeschooled free market kids who could smash these lightweights who were drooling over their iPads at that age. The future is bright.
While I don’t blame the Iraq war on Israel (Bush and Cheney deserve the honors), Israel is perfectly capable of letting America know when it’s not happy with what America is doing. Remember how Bibi acted towards Obama during Obama’s presidency?
And Israel could have certainly come out against the U.S.’ invasion of Iraq. It might not have kept the war from happening, but it would have made the pro-war argument a LOT harder here.
