homersapien

No, you focus. This is about characterizing Harris as the "Border - or immigration Czar" which implies she had executive responsibility of the border. That's not true, as the article I linked demonstrates. Her role was basically diplomatic and was aimed to increase economic development in the countries these immigrants originated. Feel free to criticize her performance, but don't "spin" her responsibilities for partisan political purposes.

Exactly. Biden never called her that. The title was a media creation. In fact, her role was more diplomatic than executive: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kamala-harris-immigration-biden-administration-border/ The facts about Kamala Harris' role on immigration in the Biden administration "Mr. Biden tasked Harris with leading the administration's diplomatic campaign to address the "root causes" of migration from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, including poverty, corruption and violence."

There's some truth in that.

Sure, at a given demonstration. But there were thousands of demonstrations that had zero violence. To say most of these demonstrations were peaceful is correct. To simply characterize such demonstrations in general as violent is deceptive and untrue. You are the one "spinning" the few that were violent. "Polls in the summer of 2020 estimated that between 15 million and 26 million people had participated at some point in the demonstrations in the United States, making the protests the largest in U.S. history." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_protests

This thread is a case for atheism.

"Responded in kind"? By introducing the subject of Pete Buttigieg's gay marriage for the purpose of throwing shade at Democrats. You revealed yourself, even if you refuse to "own it".

I try not to assume motives. I simply react to posts, which are what they are. You wrote that I introduced "racism" to the discussion simply because I (arbitrarily) used civil rights as an example of how "tradition" can be bad and should be changed. That's preposterous. I regret that makes you feel bad but that's not really my problem. I am not obligated to accept whatever you write about me. And you can always ignore me. Have a good day and War Eagle.

Again, using the civil rights movement as an obvious example of improving the country by changing the laws is not bringing "race" into the "equation" (discussion). And again, to think that way is a little racist in itself. Next time I'll use women's suffrage. You don't have a problem with feminism do you? And of course you have no problem with the way our elections are now held. Republicans keep winning with a minority of votes. As a a result potential legislation that the majority of the American people support, doesn't get considered. And other laws that the majority of Americans opposed get passed. That's a little hard to explain to the rest of the world who (used to) consider us the global standard of democratic governments. Hell, we'd be better off switching to a parliamentary system of government. Seriously.

My take is he's trying to shade Democrats and - seizing on the fact Pete is a gay Democrat - is associating homosexuality with Democrats. Of course, that requires a personal belief that homosexuality is necessarily a bad or shameful thing. But he either doesn't have the balls to admit he's homophobic (no pun intended) or he is simply too embarrassed to admit it. Like I said, I prefer to think its the latter since that at least indicates progress.

Smart move loser.

Oh, I get it now. (I don't use the term "HO".) But as Spock might say, it is logical.

I haven't read it yet. But I do admire Pete. Implying I was offended by the book is a lie and makes no sense. You won't own up to the real reason you posted it. Everyone knows, so you might as well admit it. You've offered nothing but that creepy little emoticon rubbing the head of another little emoticon. But like I said, it's fun watching you squirm and evade the truth, all because you put yourself into an embarrassing position. Its the only reason I respond at all.

A sure sign you've got nothing. Started with a revealing, homophobic post and can't withstand the cross-examination. Brilliant!

Nothing more fun than watching a racist - or homophobe - dance around their homophobia or racism instead of just admitting it. I supposed that could be a sign of progress - they're too embarrassed to own up to it. "Bless their hearts".