this post was submitted on 18 Jan 2024
145 points (97.4% liked)

politics

19360 readers
2510 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] themeatbridge 108 points 1 year ago (3 children)

This was your fucking idea! We don't have to do comprehensive immigration reform, but the GOP demanded it be done before funding support for Ukraine.

It's a transparent stall tactic. "Now is not the time to shit, but I refuse to get off the pot."

[–] Theprogressivist 47 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Especially because in the GOP world, the US has open borders, and millions of illegal immigrants are coming in droves. So if that's true, why delay any solution to the problem? Because the problem does not exist.

[–] Taco2112 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They want “boarder security” not “immigration reform”. They can campaign to their base on the first but not the second.

[–] SkybreakerEngineer 7 points 1 year ago

One means "shoot brown people" and one means "hire more judges".

[–] WhatAmLemmy 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You just made me realize that I'm an idiot.

My brain always associated pot with weed... probably from all the pot... but pot just meant potty... I don't know how I survived this long, or why people pay me money to solve problems.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Pot as a word for toilet actually comes from the chamber pot.

There are a bunch of other words for a toilet, but tracking down their origins is hard.

For example, calling it a John could refer to the inventor of the flush toilet, John Harington, or as a corruption for an earlier term the Jakes/Jacks. (Kit Harington is a relation)

Jake and Jack were very common names in medieval England, much like John is today. So if you were a noble, your chamber pot would be emptied by a commoner, and the stand in name was Jake.

Other toilet names like bog or loo come from the smell.

The head was traditionally located at the front of ships, especially in the British navy...

There are dozens more (in English alone), but origins are hard to track down for most of them.

[–] dhork 45 points 1 year ago

Of course not, because there's a chance it might pass. It is much more useful to the GOP as a problem to complain about than as something to actually take action on. Plus, if something gets done and the President signs it it will make him look effective, and the GOP won't tolerate that.

Once something passes, after all, legislators might be blamed for ill effects. Why do something that exposes them to negative feedback when they can simply do nothing and still blame the opposition?

[–] fidodo 28 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Immigrants are the only reason the US isn't a total shit hole christo-fascist country. They're people who actually want to be here and cross oceans to get here and work their asses off to achieve what they couldn't do from where they were originally from. So much innovation and technology came from immigrants. So many companies were founded by immigrants. The people trying to stop immigrants are just lazy assholes who know that immigrants are harder working and better than them because they're just relying on their generational wealth and deluding themselves into thinking they earned it because they don't want to face up with how really pathetic they are.

[–] cogman 11 points 1 year ago

We could stop most undocumented migration tomorrow with 1 simple change, stiff penalties on companies that employ undocumented workers and have ICE investigate business owners for employing or contracting undocumented workers. You can literally visit almost any farm in the US and find 100s of undocumented workers being treated like shit.

But instead, republicans like to focus all their efforts on the boarder. Why? Because the threat of expulsion makes for good slave labor.

That's why they are constantly worried about undocumented immigrants using social services. The don't want their slaves educated or looked in on. They don't want CPS asking "Hey, isn't that child supposed to be in school? Why are they picking grapes right now?" So they constantly demonize and terrorize to make sure their slaves know "If you get too uppity, we'll separate your family and send them back to the cartels."

[–] Riccosuave 2 points 1 year ago

Good point.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago

Fucking hate these cretins.

[–] RizzRustbolt 10 points 1 year ago

Welp... he's gone.

[–] Buffalox 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

All Johnson wants is to stall and have plausible deniability. He is an obvious traitor together with most of the other house Republicans, who are actively working for their president to fail in tasks that are crucial to the security of USA.

[–] Taco2112 9 points 1 year ago

What a bunch of turds. They want to “secure the border” but don’t want immigration reform because immigration reform would allow in….immigrants. But, I’d bet money that most(all?) of the people in congress against immigration reform would happily use the Statue of Liberty in their ads.

[–] Rapidcreek 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Donald Trump told Fox News that he opposes the Senate immigration deal and wants Speaker Mike Johnson to oppose it too.

He said he doesn’t think it’s needed to secure the border.

[–] gAlienLifeform 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ted Kaczynski also occasionally said some correct things and deserved to be in a prison cell

The time for immigration reform is after the Democratic party has secured a filibuster proof majority in the Senate and control of the House and doesn't have to humor these racist douchenozzles anymore

[–] Rapidcreek -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We haven't touched immigration laws for 33 years. We are essentially working off of 1965 framework. While we have far more people trying to immigrate, we also have a political party that enjoys using it as a wedge issue. Rather than taking more children from their parents, IMO it is the time to act and not wait for the perfect occasion

[–] gAlienLifeform 2 points 1 year ago

While we have far more people trying to immigrate

This is no kind of problem, we have plenty of space and material wealth to support a lot more people here, we just lack the political will to see it distributed efficiently

we also have a political party that enjoys using it as a wedge issue

Which is why we should be reminding people that this isn't a problem, instead of validating that shithead political party by pretending like it is with trash legislation like this

With global climate change set to get really bad in the next century, this is the absolute wrong time for us to be listening to the selfish idiots who think they can just hide behind a wall while millions of people die and that that won't come back on them or their descendants in any way

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


voiced his skepticism of a deal being crafted in the Senate to pair border and migration policy changes with Ukraine aid, and said that now is not the time for comprehensive immigration reform.

2 reflects,” Johnson added, referring to the House GOP border and migration policy bill that the chamber passed last year.

listens to a question after a closed-door House Republican Conference meeting on Wednesday, January 17, 2024.

Johnson’s comments come ahead of a White House meeting Wednesday afternoon with other congressional leaders and President Biden.

A bipartisan group of senators have been working for weeks on a deal to pair border and migration policy changes with Ukraine aid.

The deal is expected to include changes to asylum policy, but negotiators have said that the issue of parole is a major sticking point in the talks.


The original article contains 456 words, the summary contains 137 words. Saved 70%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!