And, any time he tries to do anything about it, e.g. reducing the rate of people allowed to come across the border or increasing funding for ICE, everyone on the left as far as I can tell thinks he’s just being cruel on purpose for no reason and gets really mad at him.
I’m on the left, and don’t think he lacks a reason for being cruel on purpose.
He’s being cruel on purpose, either in a misguided attempt to get Republican voters to like him, or as part of a demonstration that Republican politicians aren’t interested in solutions, even their own.
But he’s not a Republican; the deliberate cruelty isn’t the point. It’s a means to an end.
The problem is, since he’s not a Republican, Republicans won’t vote for him. And everyone already knows that Republicans aren’t interested in solutions, so no demonstration was needed. So he’s being cruel on purpose for shitty reasons.
I’ll ask you, then, the same thing I have asked a few other people who have made this same assertion: what should Biden do, then? If presumably we can agree that it’s bad people waiting in ICE custody for over a year for their cases to be heard, then what solution to it should he pursue, that you wouldn’t then criticize as cruelty?
I’ll ask you, then, the same thing I have asked a few other people who have made this same assertion: what should Biden do, then?
Nothing. If the only action he can take is deliberate cruelty, he should take no action. It won’t solve immigration, but endlessly trying in vain to appease fascists isn’t going to solve anything either.
That’s awesome – an actual answer. I can work with this. Follow-up question: Why is “nothing” the right answer to this and this? Why would you describe hiring more judges as deliberate cruelty?
I do actually agree on some of the actual cruelty things he tried to offer the Republicans, as a compromise, but that’s a very small minority of the things this administration has tried to do about the border, and when they did it didn’t happen anyway. The majority of what they’re doing as far as I know has been things like hiring more judges (i.e. obviously the right thing to do) or limiting the number of people coming in the country (which was an attempt to deal with problem #2 which also worsened problem #1, but it’s hard to see it as some villainous act, to me, given that problem #1 exists).
Why would you describe hiring more judges as deliberate cruelty?
I wouldn’t. I would describe this:
And, any time he tries to do anything about it, e.g. reducing the rate of people allowed to come across the border or increasing funding for ICE
As cruelty, which is what I initially responded to.
Since you have decided to be dishonest about my position, I’m not going to continue this conversation. I should have known, given every other conversation we’ve ever had.
Interesting. So, if you want to clarify that “the only action he can take is deliberate cruelty” doesn’t apply to hiring more judges, and that you think hiring more judges isn’t deliberately cruel, then cool – obviously, I agree with you about that.
If you want to seize on that one sentence to pretend I’m engaged in bad faith and flee the conversation at this stage – and not engage with anything else I said or asked you – I won’t stop you. I think actually it’s probably a good idea tactically for you to do so. Cheers.
So, if you want to clarify that “the only action he can take is deliberate cruelty” doesn’t apply to hiring more judges, and that you think hiring more judges isn’t deliberately cruel, then cool – obviously, I agree with you about that.
Why would I say that hiring judges is cruel? You deliberately lied about my position. Sealion at someone else.
I know, right? It would be insane to claim that trying to hire more judges is an exercise in deliberate cruelty. I am glad to have you as an ally in this assertion, because there are lots of people who are claiming all kinds of weird things about what Biden’s attempting to do at the border and why.
Anyway, like I said, I won’t keep you; I’ll go and sealion somewhere else I guess.
I’m on the left, and don’t think he lacks a reason for being cruel on purpose.
He’s being cruel on purpose, either in a misguided attempt to get Republican voters to like him, or as part of a demonstration that Republican politicians aren’t interested in solutions, even their own.
But he’s not a Republican; the deliberate cruelty isn’t the point. It’s a means to an end.
The problem is, since he’s not a Republican, Republicans won’t vote for him. And everyone already knows that Republicans aren’t interested in solutions, so no demonstration was needed. So he’s being cruel on purpose for shitty reasons.
I’ll ask you, then, the same thing I have asked a few other people who have made this same assertion: what should Biden do, then? If presumably we can agree that it’s bad people waiting in ICE custody for over a year for their cases to be heard, then what solution to it should he pursue, that you wouldn’t then criticize as cruelty?
Nothing. If the only action he can take is deliberate cruelty, he should take no action. It won’t solve immigration, but endlessly trying in vain to appease fascists isn’t going to solve anything either.
That’s awesome – an actual answer. I can work with this. Follow-up question: Why is “nothing” the right answer to this and this? Why would you describe hiring more judges as deliberate cruelty?
I do actually agree on some of the actual cruelty things he tried to offer the Republicans, as a compromise, but that’s a very small minority of the things this administration has tried to do about the border, and when they did it didn’t happen anyway. The majority of what they’re doing as far as I know has been things like hiring more judges (i.e. obviously the right thing to do) or limiting the number of people coming in the country (which was an attempt to deal with problem #2 which also worsened problem #1, but it’s hard to see it as some villainous act, to me, given that problem #1 exists).
I wouldn’t. I would describe this:
As cruelty, which is what I initially responded to.
Since you have decided to be dishonest about my position, I’m not going to continue this conversation. I should have known, given every other conversation we’ve ever had.
Interesting. So, if you want to clarify that “the only action he can take is deliberate cruelty” doesn’t apply to hiring more judges, and that you think hiring more judges isn’t deliberately cruel, then cool – obviously, I agree with you about that.
If you want to seize on that one sentence to pretend I’m engaged in bad faith and flee the conversation at this stage – and not engage with anything else I said or asked you – I won’t stop you. I think actually it’s probably a good idea tactically for you to do so. Cheers.
Why would I say that hiring judges is cruel? You deliberately lied about my position. Sealion at someone else.
I know, right? It would be insane to claim that trying to hire more judges is an exercise in deliberate cruelty. I am glad to have you as an ally in this assertion, because there are lots of people who are claiming all kinds of weird things about what Biden’s attempting to do at the border and why.
Anyway, like I said, I won’t keep you; I’ll go and sealion somewhere else I guess.