HOW WE GOT HERE: "We'll always have Paris," he famously said!

FRIDAY, MAY 9, 2025

So too with the southern border: "We'll always have Paris," the Bogart character famously says.

The screenplay for the famous film was assembled on the fly. The film's miraculous ending—part of its miraculously insightful script—was almost a bit of an accident.

According to the American Film Institute, six of the hundred greatest movie quotations of all time came from this one film—or at least that was true as of 2005.

Actually, it was six of the sixty-seven greatest quotations—and that doesn't even include the endlessly cited quotation in which Captain Renault says he's "shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here."

(According to the AFI, "We'll always have Paris" was the 43rd greatest quotation. "Here's looking at you, kid" was listed at number 5.)

"We'll always have Paris," he famously said. The famous statement brilliantly captures one part of human experience. 

In modern times, the men and women of the Fox News Channel will always have a certain rhetorical helpmate. That's also true of the elected officials of the MAGA world.

They'll always have the southern border—though they have other clear winners too.

More specifically, the tribunes of today's Red America will always have President Biden's unexplained southern border. That drama was played out yesterday right there on the floor of the House.

The House was wasting its time debating a bill to rename the Gulf of Mexico. At the end of a pointless debate, Rep. Jared Huffman (D—CA) mocked the foolishness of the bill. 

With that, up jumped Huffman's opposite number, and he delivered the win:

ACTING SPEAKER (5/8/25): The gentleman from Arkansas is recognized.

REP. BRUCE WESTERMAN (R-AR): Mr. Speaker, as we wrap up this so-called debate today, I want to remind everyone of something that you are not seeing on the news every day, like you were several months ago. And that's hordes coming across our southern border...

The southern border had nothing to do with the legislation under review! But whenever the going gets tough, the various tribunes of Red America can always fall back on that topic.

They'll always have the southern border! Rather, they'll always have the unexplained history of the border as it existed under President Biden. It's one of the ways the sitting president is able to maintain his current level of support in the national polls. 

They'll always have the image of those "hordes" coming across that border during the Biden years. Also, they'll always have the violent crimes which were committed by some of the people who came across that unregulated border—and they'll always have our evasive non-responses when they refer to those violent crimes.

Those are easy winning issues for Red America's tribunes. No matter how bad other matters may get, they can always fall back on those points, as Rep. Westerman did.

Also, they'll always have Blue America's refusal to explain the border policy of the Biden years. Almost surely, this helps explain why President Trump's approval rating still stands at 42 percent.

They'll always have the fact that our tribunes in Blue America have never even tried to explain what was happening during those years. No matter how stupid Red America's leadership cadres may get, they'll always have the border to help keep voters on the pro-Trump train. 

President Biden never tried to explain the policy at the border. (We have our own assumption, which could of course be wrong.) 

President Biden never tried to explain! Others claimed, in the face of all appearances, that the border actually was closed and secure.

That was astonishing conduct. We Blues continue to pay for that conduct, even as we keep pretending that none of this really occurred.

They'll always have the border! Nor is that the only gift we Blues have handed our rivals. We've handed them so may "own goals" that President Trump actually managed to get something right on Sunday's Meet the Press,

Gifted with a pair of prizes, the commander offered this:

WELKER (5/4/25): Do you see dissent as an essential part of democracy?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: It's a part of democracy. It is. You're always going to have dissent—

WELKER: Is it an important part of democracy?

TRUMP: You’re always going to have—Kristen, you're always going to have dissent. There's nothing you're going to do about that. Am I going to get 100 percent unified? It would be a strange place. I can't even imagine it where 100 percent—

Look. You have people that are good people. They're very smart people. And they honestly believe we should have open borders and the entire world should be allowed to pour into our country. I think it's a 95/5 issue, but they believe it. They're not even bad people—some of them are bad. 

You have people that honestly believe that men should be allowed to play in women's sports. Some of these people—I really, actually I don't know any; I haven't been able to find any—but they exist. They say it's an 80/20 issue. I don't believe that. I think it's a 97/3 issue.

President Trump had the southern border. He also had "men [being] allowed to play in women's sports," as he chose to characterize it.

He said it was a 97/3 issue. According to NBC News, it's actually 75/25—but that depends on the way you phrase the question concerning this relatively new topic. 

(According to Pew, it's 66/15.)

Should transgender girls and women be allowed to participate in girls' and women's sports? It's a relatively new public policy question, spinning off from a relatively new public policy topic. 

We Blues ted to act like this is all settled material. (If you don't agree, you're a very bad person.) Once again, here's what Michelle Goldberg recently said:

What on Earth Is Gavin Newsom Doing?

[...]

As a matter of both political expediency and simple honesty, Democrats should be able to acknowledge that it’s unfair to expect elite female athletes to compete against trans women who’ve gone through male puberty. But at a time when the Trump administration has singled trans people out for persecution, Democrats need to couple their recognition of physical difference with a broader defense of trans rights.

Is it "unfair to expect elite female athletes to compete against trans women who’ve gone through male puberty?" Should Democrats "be able to acknowledge" something like that?

In our view, that doesn't seem like a crazy stance. For ourselves, we'd say that Democrats should at least be able to acknowledge that there's an unresolved question lingering there—a question we need to address as a nation, not as two warring tribes. 

But of one thing we can be certain—at present, this topic represents an easy political win for Red America. In the foreseeable future, Red America will always have this safe (political) space to run to. In his recent interview with Mediaite, Charlie Sykes included this topic in his list of places where he said we Blues have basically failed:

Is ‘Never Trump’ Dead? Charlie Sykes On The One Thing That Could Actually Restrain Trump

[,,,]

SYKES: I mean, the reality is there are a lot of swing voters that actually were concerned about inflation. So simply denying that inflation was a problem was a mistake. 

There are swing voters that were concerned about crime, and simply telling them that crime is a myth is basically says we don’t care about what you think. 

The border was a real problem during the Biden years, and that needs to be addressed. 

There was a reason why the Trump campaign spent more than a hundred million dollars on one ad, one ad involving transgender surgeries and athletes. And yet, if you listen to Democrats and folks on the left, that issue didn’t exist at all.

So simply saying "These are fake issues, don’t pay any attention to them" means that you shut yourself off from things that voters are talking about. 

He also mentioned the southern border. Also, he mentioned "the Joe Biden age story," another ginormous own goal for which we Blues are still being battered, with more such losses to come.

Astoundingly ugly behavior can now be found among Red America's corporate cadres. As we noted yesterday, on the nation's most-watched "cable news" program, one co-host spouted this late Wednesday afternoon:

JUDGE JEANINE (5/7/25): So, Greg, because [former president Biden] wants to be more active and involved, would you go listen?

GUTFELD: Fine! Do it on his time, don't do it on our time. Go out literally to a pasture and pass away! He chose BBC because it stands for "Biden—Bury or Cremate?" 

[...]

As long as Joe emerges from the crypt with his old man smell—nobody is listening to what he's saying. They're just looking at it and going, "Christ! This actually was president?"

WATTERS: [Snickering]

President Biden should wander off in a pasture and die! Enough with his "old man smell!"

Garbage like that comes out of the can on a regular basis. Five hours later, that extremely strange co-host introduced a pseudo-discussion on his own Gutfeld! program by reciting this singsong rhyme:

GUTFELD (5/7/25): His pants full of turds, Biden speaks more words.

We know—you think we're making that up! Go ahead—click that link! 

As this garbage keeps spilling out of the can, the exalted orgs (and the stars) of Blue America just keep looking away. To appearances, life is still good where those tribunes live, and they don't want to grapple with Fox.

The Crazy or perhaps its first cousins are all around us at this point in time. The Crazy has emerged from the can and it's ruling humankind. 

Also, there's the endless array of imperfect judgments committed by us, the vastly self-impressed Blues.

We Blues have a whole lot of splainin' to do! That said, there are few signs that we understand any such fact, or that we plan to react—but in this report, we've barely scratched the surface of the ways our imperfections are helping to keep President Trump afloat. 

Bogie and Bergman will always have Paris. People like Gutfeld and Judge Jeanine will always have the southern border, plus many more gifts beyond that. 

Does our tribal blindness help explain why President Trump hasn't dropped, let's say, down to 35 percent? We'd have to assume that it does.

We Blues! Our political judgment is often quite poor, and our tribunes have frequently misbehaved. In our view, the other tribe is substantially worse at this time—but we Blues are rich in imperfections and acts of deception too.

We aren't the giants we claim to be.  Everyone knows this but us!

56 comments:

  1. Rick and Ilsa could never return to Paris. It could only be a memory. A better analogy is “The Return of Dracula”. Open borders could return if a Dem is elected.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ""We'll always have Paris," he famously said. The famous statement brilliantly captures one part of human experience.

      In modern times, the men and women of the Fox News Channel will always have a certain rhetorical helpmate. That's also true of the elected officials of the MAGA world.

      They'll always have the southern border—though they have other clear winners too."

      This is yet another example of the way Somerby grabs a phrase because he resonates to a few words in it, ignoring the overall meaning, and then repurposes that phrase to advance his own points.

      Of course Rick and Ilsa are talking about their memories of Paris, which will have to substitute for going back together, and refers also to their entire relationship, given that Rick is sending her back to her resistance husband because the war effort needs her to keep him motivated and not depressed. Rick and Ilsa are sacrificing their own future for the needs of the world because defeating Germany is important to many people.

      Ignoring all of this, and its relevance to our current situation, Somerby focuses only on the part that says "we'll always have," applying it literally to Fox's use of a particular rhetorical device. Then he segues into discussing Trump's remark about always having dissent.

      This oft-quoted movie line about Paris is in the top of the list because it captures nostalgia and more importantly, sacrifice, not because it talks about always having something. Somerby is as superficial as Trump when he pulls this trick, which does often.

      Many of us have strong emotional reactions to these classic films. We care about the people and what happens to them, but we also care about the lessons of the films, what the film-maker is saying about difficult life circumstances and admiral human traits, Rick and Ilsa's nobility and Victor Laszlo's bravery and committment. These could have been applied by Somerby to today's circumstances, now mirroring those of WWII's restrictions on travel. Instead he goes for the most trivial relation possible.

      Trump's picture of himself as the pope trampled on strongly held beliefs, images that were important to Catholics worldwide, which trump defiled. Somerby's misuse of literary references and films to advance trivial points, is similarly upsetting to those of us who care deeply about our nation's distress and Somerby defiles that quote and its meaning in order to quote Trump. Somerby's tone-deaf cluelessness is shocking as a measure of how senile his essays are becoming, how willing he is to offend the left, which may be the only source of resistance to autocracy these days. Bravery is needed, not insensitivity.

      Delete
    2. Exactl y, the film revolves around missing exit visas and passes into Europe needed by the resistance to get their leader to the warzone.

      An actual liberal might have used that as a rhetorical device to discuss the continuing harrassment of legal immigrants, the ongoing court efforts to get kidnapped people released, the handful of successes who have now been sent home, and the efforts by Trump to get the Supreme Court to let him ship people granted legal asylum to third countries (he has already revoked their asylum, illegally in violation of both the constitution and our asylum laws). There is a war being fought against immigrants in our country. People like Ilsa, Rick, Captain Renault, Victor Laszlo, nearly every character in the film, all immigrants to Casablanca which is Morocco.

      The world is more complex than Somerby makes it and the right wing are the bad guys in this drama.

      Delete

  2. Democrats, those of them who are not idiots, should leave their godforsaken utterly corrupt, useless party, and join a different one. Hopefully a more populist, less technocratic one.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Winning!

    https://thehill.com/business/5292037-auto-industry-critics-trump-uk-deal/

    ReplyDelete
  4. In totality, Trump is the least popular, least respected president in modern times.

    Trump is also the most corrupt and criminal president of all time.

    During Trump's first reign, he polled in the 39-44% range his entire term, which is where he is still polling now, and notably Trump got stomped by Dems in 2018 and 2020, polling at the same level he is now.

    Somerby is trying to put lipstick on a pig in order to continue his sole agenda of finger wagging and tsk tsking at Dems, and misinforming while doing that, since Trump is now under water on the immigration issue (as well as most other issues).

    ReplyDelete
  5. The Republicans like to wrap their lies in a small grain of truth. It doesn't make any difference if the grain is tiny or large. And they'll always find a grain, no matter how small. No point in preemptive flinching.
    Tiny grain: Democrats want men in women's sports. (None do.) Larger grain: Democrats believe in open borders. (Some do.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Largest grain: All Libertarians support open borders.

      Delete
  6. Somerby thinks his stance on transwomen competing in sports is reasonable but the problem is that he is ignorant of the facts on the ground.

    First, the NCAA already addresses the issue and there are specific rules and tests in different sports to ensure fairness for all involved. This didn't need to become a political issue.

    Second, the number of transwomen (or girls) who are sufficiently athletic to compete and win is tiny, so tiny that this fuss seems to have been conjured from nothing. For most female athletes, being beaten by a transwoman in a sport engaged in for recreation is little different than being beaten by a better trained, more athletic cisgender female competitor. It is no big deal. Nothing is at stake. Most athletes at that level compete against their own personal best scores with little hope of winning except occasionally, so the level of unfairness is trivial too.

    Third, losing is part of being a competitor. You win some and you lose some, but accepting losses (fair and unfair for various reasons) is part of competing. Coaches and parents used to know that but there are some hypercompetitive parents who set a bad example for their offspring and are a pain in the neck for coaches.

    Fourth, there is an assumption that a male (after puberty) who has transitioned will automatically have an advantage in any sport, but that is not necessarily true. There may be a disadvantage to the transathelete due to development of unfamiliar muscles that throw off balance and coordination, especially without a lot of practice in a changed body. For transwomen, the change in the disposition of fat, and the change in hormones, may disrupt previous athletic ability. It is up to doctors and coaches to determine whether there is a disqualifying advantage instead of a negative effect on performance, on an athlete by athlete basis. That is why a blanket law is harmful and ultimately unfair by limiting the ability of a transgirl to even play a previously favorite sport.

    Fifth, where does it stop? Why not ban transwomen from competing in mindsports (chess, gaming) or from applying for scholarships or jobs. There is a neurosexist movement that believes that men have better brains than women. Why not bar transwomen and girls from participation in any form of competition, such as scholarships or scholastic competitions? The men who worry so much about girls competing against transgirls would love to bar women from competing against them as transmen or boys, since we know that girls are more verbal and better writers and scholars with higher grades. I suspect their motives when they protest that they are merely protecting their daughters with these unnecessary restrictions on competition.

    Girls who are serious about developing athletic skills plead for the chance to compete against boys because they know it sharpens their skills to do so. Restricting those girls from better competition is unfair to them in a different way. Many want to be their best, but limiting who they can play with and against undermines that desire. That is unfair to anyone with a strong competitive spirit, as many girls share.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "the number of transwomen (or girls) who are sufficiently athletic to compete and win is tiny,"

      It may be tiny but it would be better if there were none.

      "losing is part of being a competitor."

      Yes. But losing to a man if you're a woman shouldn't be part of being a competitor.

      "That is why a blanket law is harmful and ultimately unfair by limiting the ability of a transgirl to even play a previously favorite sport."

      Transgirls can compete in their favorite sport against boys. Problem solved.

      "Why not bar transwomen and girls from participation in any form of competition, such as scholarships or scholastic competitions?"

      Because the male advantage is physical, not mental. Duh.

      Delete
    2. This is nothing but propaganda designed by Republicans, who want the people under the thumb of big government.
      Ho hum, another day that ends in "y".

      Delete
    3. Why should losing to a man not be part of being a competitor, or vice versa, a man losing to a woman. It happens in jobs and in TV game shows and in co-ed pickleball and other unregulated aspects of life. The idea that a woman should not lose to a man or vice versa is arbitrary and unjustified except to those who want games to be restricted for entertainment purposes. Remember the frenzy when the NFL introduced female kickers, as it has from time to time? Segregation of sports is artificial and unrelated to performance since there are many boys who are no good at sports and just choose not to compete at all in them. The male "advantage" needs to be demonstrated via competition, not assumed to exist. All sports are both mental and physical.

      Delete
    4. Okay then, if we're going to mix the sexes together in competitive sports, let's follow that reasoning out to its logical conclusion and mix ages, too.

      Let adults compete against 5 year olds. After all, the idea that a kid should not lose to a man or a woman is arbitrary and unjustified. And there are many adults who aren't good at sports.

      Delete
    5. Do you think age and gender are comparable? I don’t.

      Delete
  7. Open borders, open sports, open competition, we used to call that freedom.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Adrian Carrisquillo points out that Trump's numbers may be falling because his previously low-information base is seeing break-through stories about his immigration abuses:

    "Voters in one of the demographic groups key to Trump’s re-election—young men without a college degree, online but only marginally politically engaged—tend not to rely so much on conventional news sources. Trump’s sharp drop in the polls didn’t just happen because the New York Times and Washington Post published tough stories. It happened because the stories those outlets broke and reported started getting picked up by mainstream infotainment—including by one of the guys credited with helping Trump win back the White House: Joe Rogan.

    At the end of March, Rogan hit Trump hard on the cruelty and lawlessness of his deportation policies. While discussing the case of Andry José Hernández Romero, the gay makeup artist and hairdresser who has not been heard from since he was thrown into the Salvadoran CECOT prison almost two months ago, Rogan said it’s “horrific” that “people who aren’t criminals are getting lassoed up and deported.”

    https://www.thebulwark.com/p/trump-immigration-derpotation-horror-stories-reaching-new-audiences-rogan-comedy-oliver-brocasters-sports

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here is another example of such a story reaching a wider audience that includes Trump's base:

      "Pablo Torre, formerly of ESPN and now host of the podcast and YouTube show Pablo Torre Finds Out, had journalist Paola Ramos on for a nearly hour-long episode last week titled “Trump Deported This Goalkeeper to a Terrorist Prison—for a Real Madrid Tattoo.”

      The episode centered on the story of Jerce Reyes Barrios, a former professional soccer player in Venezuela, who marched against the Maduro regime, for which he was tortured with electric shocks and suffocation. After his release, he legally sought asylum in the United States. But the Trump administration used his tattoo of a crown sitting atop a soccer ball—inspired by his love of Real Madrid—as justification to label him a Tren de Aragua gang member and ship him off to a foreign gulag with no hearing.

      “This is a sports story,” Torre told me when I asked why he chose to highlight Barrios’s case. “It just became very clear to me Jerce is the athlete this administration does not want you to know about.”

      Barrios, an undersized goalkeeper, worked his way up from travel teams to the third division of a Venezuelan pro league. His breakthrough came in a tournament more than a decade ago. Staring down penalty kicks, his performance would decide not only the outcome of the game, but whether his team got promoted to a higher league. Thanks to a game-winning save, Barrios became a fan favorite, and he eventually made it up to the top league.

      “If you just change the country from Venezuela to the United States, this is a sports movie,” Torre tells me."

      Delete
    2. Cont.

      "Ramos, who has reported on immigrants and Latino communities in the United States for MSNBC, Telemundo, and Vice, had another good reason for seeking out Torre to collaborate on Barrios’s story: the chance to reach a new demographic. (“The supermajority of our audience is male,” Torre had told me earlier.)

      “Most of the audience I’m talking to at MSNBC or Telemundo is familiar with that story, millennials or an older liberal crowd, or Latinos. But to be able to tell it to a male audience, that to me seemed new and important,” Ramos added. “To be able to get a male audience that is hyperfocused on sports and these male-dominant podcasts, there’s actually an entry point through sports to get them to humanize these people that may seem less familiar to them. It’s an audience I never get to tap into—to get a Real Madrid fan to suddenly see these migrants being hypercriminalized in a different light.”

      Torre said his experiences writing for sports magazines taught him an important lesson about building narratives. People start reading a story because they’re a fan of the sport or team it’s about—but if they finish it, it’s because they were drawn in by what and who they’re reading about.

      “What’s the human story here? What’s the surprise, the twist, the takeaways?” he asks himself. “The cheese to melt on the broccoli of whatever nutritional content is worth giving to people.”

      He continued:

      There’s absurdity in the basic premise that this administration is using sports as a way of disappearing people, whether through a tattoo homage to Real Madrid or Kilmar Abrego Garcia wearing a Chicago Bulls cap. As someone who sees sports as their thing, how are we okay with letting this administration co-opt our culture as sports fans to do horrific shit?"

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. Somerby occasionally talks about sports. Perhaps he is unaware of the mistreatment of international athletes by ICE? He seems to be only willing to think about immigrants as criminals but, as the statistics show, most are much less criminal than native born American citizens.

      When Somerby takes for granted that everyone must see the wisdom of exporting everyone who crossed our border (legal or not, greencard or not, asylum-seeking or not), but many of us outside Trump's cult know immigrants personally and like them as people, witness their challenges and recognize their strengths, their admiration of the USA, their desire to make a good life here. We are not seeing criminals but human beings. If Somerby is so isolated in his neighborhood of Baltimore that he doesn't know such people, he needs to read more and get out more. There are excellent books about immigrant life, movies and TV shows about people who have come here from other countries. Or Somerby could travel to other countries himself to see that most people are not criminals or crazy there, but normal people leading their lives, just as we do here.

      Somerby has the right to be a xenophobic bigot, but he and his ilk do not have the right to break our laws and violate the Constitution just because they are afraid of people with accents or brown skin. More and more people are waking up to what is happening. In the meantime, I pray that the courts continue to be a seawall against the mistreatment of immigrants that Trump is instigating in order to tear down our democracy and violate the other laws that currently restrain his greed and vengeful nature. Today, he is attacking immigrants. Tomorrow he will turn the military onto protesters and after that he will invade the privacy of every person in order to punish those who write nasty things about him on the internet. Our country will not be worth living in, if Trump is left to abuse those who are less able to fight back.

      Delete
    5. Somerby has written another shoddy embarrassing essay today. It is becoming hard to tell who is more demented -- Somerby or Trump.

      Delete
    6. 10:25 — Somerby is breaking laws and violating the Constitution? I was not aware. Thanks for waking me up to this shocking development!

      Delete
    7. Pretending there is a Republican voter who isn't a bigot is completely legal. If it wasn't, Trump could get his wish of sending reporters to gulags.

      Delete
    8. Somerby warns us that those whose “argument” is to hurl R-bombs are counter-productive to Blue electoral success.

      Delete
    9. Truth has consequences.

      Delete
    10. “Every Republican voter is a bigot” is your idea of “truth”? Or is it, instead, the very essence of “prejudice” and “bigotry”?

      Delete
    11. DG has not noticed all the govt employees, military officers, even the head of the Library of Congress, fired for being a DEI hire (which means black, minority or female). Isn’t that evidence of Republican bigotry? Republican voters applaud the destruction of all DEI programs.

      Delete
    12. DG,
      How many more decades will you need to find the Republican voter who isn't a bigot?

      Delete
    13. DG,
      Can you tell the difference between Neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and the fine people on the Right?
      If so, how?

      Delete
    14. DG's silence is deafening.

      Delete
  9. Where has Mister Fanny been?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Our Host posits that the Red Team will "always have the southern border." He proposes that the Republicans will continue to draw voters to their side because We Blues neglected to explain Biden's policies on migration.

    With respect, I disagree.

    Team Red made little, if any headway by waving their arms about tthe number of people entering the U.S. The total number of immigrants in the country didn't change enough to give them an electoral advantage.

    That's why they had to resort to making up and circulating wild, scary tales to turn migration into an issue. Trump began this way back in the 2016 campaign. He regaled his rally audiences with lurid tales of sex traffickers driving across the border with women bound with duct tape in the back seat. Neither Trump nor his campaign ever produced a source for his tale.

    This time around, the tales became even more fantastic. "They're eating the cats," was the most outlandish, but not his only horror story. His favoriate was the fantasy that "all the countries in the world" were emptying their prisons and insane asylums to flood our country with dangerous, psychotic criminals. His story was examine again and again in the press and not even a whisper of evidence was ever unearthed to support it.

    The most widely circulated fantasy was the claim that Biden was doing this all deliberately to destroy the country and/or somehow allow migrants to votek. This story had the advantage of tying together a couple of Trump favorites: election fraud and the great replacement.

    In short, Trump and the Republicans told big, whopping lies to gin up fears of immigrants. And people fell for it.

    Lies this detatched from relity can endure only for a while. It takes increasing effort to sustain them when their apocalyptic predictions fail to materialize.

    Trump tells outrageous stories, ones that would be quickly dismissed if told by practically anyone else. Somehow, he gets people to believe him. I believe few other public figures can replicate his ability to fool some of the people all of the time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quaker - Your points are pretty much accurate. But you omitted a couple of things that change the conclusion.
      1. Biden really did have almost open borders.
      2. Mass immigration of millions of unvetted people really did cause problems. It was unpopular.
      3. Trump’s lies and exaggerations were a way of emphasizing a real problem. That is, illegal immigration was a winning issue for Republicans.

      Delete
    2. "Trump’s lies and exaggerations were a way of emphasizing a real problem."

      Were they a good way of emphasizing a problem? What if everyone emphasized a problem by lying about it?

      These questions don't seem to trouble you.

      Delete
    3. I miss Joe Biden's low inflation rates.
      It was Morning in America, until bigots got mad that immigrants were wiping the floor with white people on the job market.

      Delete
    4. 7:30,
      Don't forget to contact your Congressional representatives, and ask them what they are doing to streamline immigration and make it easier to navigate.

      Remember, life isn't sports, and you aren't just a spectator.

      Delete
    5. @9:37 Unfortunately a great many people do lie and exaggerate to make their desired point. Advertisers do it. Lawyers do it. Dems do it. E.g., they claim that Trump called Nazis “fine people.”

      Delete
    6. David in Cal,
      We need politicians who are as honest as you.
      You don't go around pretending you can tell the difference between Neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and the "fine people" on the Right.
      This nation could use another 100 million people that honest.

      Delete
    7. "President Trump defended the white nationalists who protested in
      Charlottesville on Tuesday, saying they included “some very fine people,” while
      expressing sympathy for their demonstration against the removal of a statue of
      Confederate General Robert E. Lee. It was a strikingly different message from
      the prepared statement he had delivered on Monday, and a reversion to his
      initial response over the weekend.
      Speaking in the lobby of Trump Tower at what had been billed as a statement
      on infrastructure, a combative Trump defended his slowness to condemn white
      nationalists and neo-Nazis after the melee in central Virginia, which ended in
      the death of one woman and injuries to dozens of others, and compared the
      tearing down of Confederate monuments to the hypothetical removal of
      monuments to the Founding Fathers. He also said that counterprotesters
      deserve an equal amount of blame for the violence.
      “What about the alt-left that came charging at, as you say, at the alt-right?”
      Trump said. “Do they have any semblance of guilt?”
      “I’ve condemned neo-Nazis. I’ve condemned many different groups. But not all
      of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me,” he said.
      “You had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white
      nationalists,” Trump said. “The press has treated them absolutely unfairly.”
      “You also had some very fine people on both sides,” he said."

      https://www.congress.gov/118/meeting/house/116973/documents/HHRG-118-ED00-20240417-SD006.pdf

      Trump has flirted with Nazis during his entire political career. Pretending he just misspoke is ridiculous. He dined with Nick Fuentes at Mar-a-Lago. It is far from an exaggeration to claim that Trump said what he manifestly said about the Unite the Right rally, organized and attended by neo-Nazis.

      Delete
    8. The UK and the EU (in process and due in 2026) are requiring entrance electronic checks for tourists and visitors. These must be obtained in advance of entry. Only those transitioning through airports don't need them.

      This suggests that the entire world may soon be playing games with anyone wanting to go somewhere they weren't born. That is a major loss to everyone because travel has so many advantages and tourism is essential to some economies.

      Delete
    9. I'm late arriving this afternoon. Anon @9:37 is spot on. Why was lying and exaggerating necessary if Biden's supposed "open borders" were so unpopular and causing such massive problems.

      I'll tell you why. The facts weren't making people afraid.

      Delete
  11. I have a hangnail, and as a Right-winger, I believe it's the governments duty to do something about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Okay. How about we arrest you and send you to an El Salvadoran prison?

      Delete
  12. If defunding the IRS will get rid of the scary deficit, imagine what de-funding ICE and border security does to illegal immigration.

    ReplyDelete
  13. The USA didn't have an illegal immigration problem, when their top income tax rate was 90%.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Thank you President Trump.
    “President Donald Trump announced early Saturday morning that talks facilitated by the United States have led to a "full and immediate ceasefire" between India and Pakistan”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Border control should be 100% funded through Trump's corporate tax breaks.

      Delete
    2. You really are the most gullible soul I've ever encountered, David.

      Delete
    3. David isn't gullible.
      Like all Republican voters, David is a bigot.

      Delete


  15. Your weblog is definitely worth a read if anyone comes throughout it.

    ReplyDelete

  16. Im lucky I did because now Ive received a whole new view of this

    ReplyDelete

  17. Finally I have found something that helped me. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete

  18. You made some great points and I am grateful for for your information! Take care!

    ReplyDelete