Big C said:

---

What do you guys think about his point that there should be one physical strength/fitness standard, based on what is necessary to get the job done, and it should not vary depending on sex/gender?

I think I am okay with that, recognizing that the established standard may vary depending on the specific job.

---

Big C said:

---

What do you guys think about his point that there should be one physical strength/fitness standard, based on what is necessary to get the job done, and it should not vary depending on sex/gender?

I think I am okay with that, recognizing that the established standard may vary depending on the specific job.

---

concordtom said:

---

I am certain I've never heard a more aggressive military speech in the history of the US military industrial complex in my life.
He says we can win any and all military conflict.

Apparently he never heard of MAD. And he's missing a very important possibility.




And what's he going to do if a random bomb goes off in Times Square?

Good luck.
All this does is heighten tensions and trigger fingers.

Mark this speech in history.
For when things flare, this should be replayed and reflected upon.

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

It's a pretty ominous turn of events when the President and the Secretary of "War" consider Americans the "enemy within".

---

going4roses said:

---

Never !!! The are never wrong admit nothing deny everything

If you ask them if the sky is blue and the sun is hot they will have some lie prepared to repeat why it's not the way it actually is. Is psychotic propaganda lying just like facists operate

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

It's a pretty ominous turn of events when the President and the Secretary of "War" consider Americans the "enemy within".

---

Because they literally are. There are plenty of people who actively are rooting for and helping to facilitate the downfall of America. Put your boots on people

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

It's a pretty ominous turn of events when the President and the Secretary of "War" consider Americans the "enemy within".

---

Because they literally are. There are plenty of people who actively are rooting for and helping to facilitate the downfall of America. Put your boots on people

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

It's a pretty ominous turn of events when the President and the Secretary of "War" consider Americans the "enemy within".

---

Because they literally are. There are plenty of people who actively are rooting for and helping to facilitate the downfall of America. Put your boots on people

---

https://harpers.org/archive/1941/08/who-goes-nazi/

---

"Bill from City College to whom democracy gave a chance to design airplanes,you'll never make Nazis out of them"

I'm Bill, you pretentious twat

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

It's a pretty ominous turn of events when the President and the Secretary of "War" consider Americans the "enemy within".

---

Because they literally are. There are plenty of people who actively are rooting for and helping to facilitate the downfall of America. Put your boots on people

---

https://harpers.org/archive/1941/08/who-goes-nazi/

---

"Bill from City College to whom democracy gave a chance to design airplanes,you'll never make Nazis out of them"

I'm Bill, you pretentious twat

---

I am Spartacus, you ignorant ****.

---

socaltownie said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

It's a pretty ominous turn of events when the President and the Secretary of "War" consider Americans the "enemy within".

---

Because they literally are. There are plenty of people who actively are rooting for and helping to facilitate the downfall of America. Put your boots on people

---

Do you really believe that? I mean I guess it depend on how you DEFINE "America" but that isn't even the most committed of committed far leftist I know. They tend to be skeptical of monopoly capitalism. They are a LOT more comfortable with regulation than I (since I know about rent seeking). They tend to be pretty open to the arguments that power is embedded in rules and social structures (aka post-modernist marxists ;-). But I don't see them actively saying that the constituion sucks and they want to replace it.

Frankly that sort of rhetoric is more common (and elevated) in the far fringes of the right with their **** about a techno lead dictatorship.

---

bearister said:

---

"There are plenty of people who are…helping to facilitate the downfall of America."

I think Trump, Vance, Stephen Miller, Kristi Noem, Pam Bondi, RFK, Jr., Hegseth, and the SCOTUS pretty much have that covered all by themselves.

---

going4roses said:

---

Exactly democrat president burn it down attack the capitol

trump = make America white again

---

bearister said:

---

"I stopped reading after number 2."

That is actually surprising. That is 2 items further than most MAGAs get reading non Right Wing echo chamber news/opinions. You now officially qualify as open minded.

If you ever get a second wind, I'm adding another item:

16.https://bearinsider.com/forums/6/topics/129605

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

It's a pretty ominous turn of events when the President and the Secretary of "War" consider Americans the "enemy within".

---

Because they literally are. There are plenty of people who actively are rooting for and helping to facilitate the downfall of America. Put your boots on people

---

When Biden was president, just a few months ago, my TX cousin wanted everything to fail so that it could be rebuilt. MAGA people here, too.

Are you now saying the opposite is true?

Interesting!

---

In his view, he wanted the liberal initiatives that would facilitate the downfall of America to fail. Hopefully, clarifying that for you gives you a more objective understanding of things.

---

Seems like the same would be true of most folks on the liberal side and their opinions of conservative policies, no?

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

bearister said:

---

"There are plenty of people who are…helping to facilitate the downfall of America."

I think Trump, Vance, Stephen Miller, Kristi Noem, Pam Bondi, RFK, Jr., Hegseth, and the SCOTUS pretty much have that covered all by themselves.

---

Of course you do because you supported Sleepy Joe and Kamala and supported their open boarders and welfare to illegal aliens

---

Nobody believes in "open borders".
Another BS term which your misinformation crowd pushes is the false concept of importing illegals.

There is no faction in the democratic left who is into either of those. FoxNews says so but it's not true.

Please stop spreading misinformation.

---

Just because it doesn't match your views, it's not misinformation.

Then please explain the border situation during the last administration. I'll wait….

---

Quote:

---

Title 8 vs Title 42 - those are the two main legal authorities you'll hear about when people talk about border enforcement. Let me break them down clearly:



Title 8
What it is: The main body of U.S. immigration law (part of the U.S. Code).
How it works:
Migrants who cross without authorization are processed under immigration procedures.
They can apply for asylum, be detained, or placed into removal proceedings.
If they are deported/removed under Title 8, they usually face legal consequences (like a bar on reentry for years, or even criminal charges if they try again).
Key Point: It's the standard immigration system, with due process built in.



Title 42
What it is: A public health law from 1944 (part of the U.S. Code on Public Health and Welfare).
How it worked (2020 - 2023):
Invoked during COVID-19 to rapidly expel migrants at the border, without processing them under immigration law.
Migrants were sent back to Mexico or their country of origin within hours, usually without the chance to apply for asylum.
Expulsions under Title 42 did not carry legal penalties for future attempts, which is one reason repeat crossings surged.
Key Point: It was a temporary, pandemic-era shortcut around immigration law, officially ended in May 2023.



Title 8 vs Title 42 in Practice (3columns table)


Feature
Title 8 (Normal Immigration Law)
Title 42 (Public Health Expulsion)


Basis
Immigration law
Public health law


Applies when
Always (default law)
Pandemic emergency (Mar 2020May 2023)


Process
Asylum claims allowed, legal proceedings, detention/release
No asylum, no due process; immediate expulsion

Consequence
Deportation = ban on reentry, possible prosecution
Expulsion = no legal penalty for repeat attempts


Duration
Permanent system
Ended May 11, 2023

---

Quote:

---

That's a really thoughtful question. If you want to analyze border crossings and expulsions/removals over the past 20 years, especially when speaking with someone who says "Democrats believe in open borders," the best way is to ground the conversation in data, context, and policy history. Here's how I'd approach it step by step:



1. Define the Metrics Clearly
Encounters / Apprehensions: Number of times Border Patrol or CBP detains someone at or between ports of entry.
Expulsions / Removals: Number of people expelled under Title 42 (20202023) or removed/deported under Title 8 (the standard immigration law).
Unique Individuals vs Encounters: Important! A single person might cross multiple times in a year, inflating the "encounters" number.

This distinction helps show that the data measure events, not just people.



2. Gather 20-Year Trends (20032023)

Here's what the official numbers show (all from U.S. Customs and Border Protection):
2000s (Bush years): Border apprehensions were very high, often 11.6 million per year.
Obama years: Numbers dropped, often below 500,000 per year after 2011 (lowest in decades). Obama also oversaw record deportations (~3 million total), earning him the nickname "Deporter-in-Chief" among immigrant advocates.
Trump years: Crossings rose again by 2019 (peaking near 850,000) despite restrictive policies. In 2020, crossings dropped sharply due to COVID, then expulsions under Title 42 began.
Biden years: Encounters surged to historic highs (over 2 million per year in FY 2022 and FY 2023), partly because Title 42 encouraged repeat attempts (people tried again and again after being expelled).



3. Show Policy Differences (Not Just Party Labels)
Bush: Mixed enforcement and guest worker proposals.
Obama: Tough enforcement, record deportations, but also DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals).
Trump: "Zero tolerance," family separation, Remain in Mexico, and Title 42 expulsions (framed as health but used for deterrence).
Biden: Ended family separation, kept Title 42 until May 2023, and expanded lawful pathways (parole programs, asylum processing apps). Still historically high removals + releases.

This shows that no administration has had "open borders"; all enforced immigration law, but their tools and priorities differed.



4. Talk About the "Open Borders" Claim
Point out that both parties have enforced the border.
Democrats may push for more legal pathways and humanitarian processing, while Republicans often emphasize deterrence and enforcement.
But the numbers show high removals under Democrats (Obama) and high encounters under both Trump and Biden.

So the claim that "Democrats want open borders" doesn't match the data it's more about policy emphasis (asylum access vs deterrence) than whether borders are enforced.



5. How to Present It
Use a timeline graph of encounters and removals 20032023. It makes the story clear:
High 2000s Low 2010s Rising 2019 COVID dip Historic highs under Biden.
Pair with policy notes so spikes/drops aren't blamed only on presidents, but also external forces (economy, violence abroad, pandemic).



The takeaway you can share:
Over the past 20 years, both Democrats and Republicans enforced border laws. Numbers went up and down due to global events and policy changes, but there's no evidence of either party pursuing truly "open borders." Instead, the differences are about how enforcement is done and what balance is struck between security and humanitarian relief.

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

bearister said:

---

"I stopped reading after number 2."

That is actually surprising. That is 2 items further than most MAGAs get reading non Right Wing echo chamber news/opinions. You now officially qualify as open minded.

If you ever get a second wind, I'm adding another item:

16.https://bearinsider.com/forums/6/topics/129605

---

You do understand that I don't seek or need your approval right? I'm not a liberal cuck and don't need everyone to agree with me. I recognize where I'm posting and that I am in the overwhelming minority when it comes to Cal alum and the Bay Area community at large. I'd argue that you are actually in the echo chamber, surrounding yourself with people who only think like you while I live and work daily (peacefully mind you!) with people who I disagree with whole heartedly

---