In [Trump's] eyes, a prolonged stalemate will likely fracture voters along traditional partisan lines, and the ultimate outcome will be a debate waged largely on the president’s terms. Increasingly, they see an upside in forcing likely incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi to have to spend the first days, if not weeks, of the next Congress engaged in an argument over border wall funding rather than her preferred agenda: a mix of sweeping ethics and election reforms and congressional oversight.I suspect that he's smoking crack on both issues. As noted before, Trump's screaming about what Tucker Carlson calls "dirty immigrants" gave the Democrats a lot more House seats than expected.
What is despicable, of course, is that Trump is wrecking part of the government solely to save his own ass. You have to know, Gentle Reader, as the rest of the Federal government comes up for funding, Trump'll shut them down, too.
Because to Trump: "L'état, c'est moi"
24 comments:
Or, one could say the same thing about the DNC folks.
The amount needed is, really, little more than a rounding error in the amount they spend every year. They waste much more than that every quarter.
For some reason, the DNC boys and girls don't want a wall. And THEY TOO are willing to shut down the government over it. They could have the folks back to work almost instantly if they'd give this one point up. But they are also willing to sacrifice those workers for points with their constituents.
But you'll realize that only if you can learn to hate the Dems (and a lot of repubs) as much, and as vehemently, as you do Trump.
B., the Republicans and the Democrats had an agreement. Donnie had agreed, until Rush and Co. whined and accused him of being weak. Donnie walked on his agreement and the Government shutdown. Donnie said it was his shutdown...and now he wants to blame someone else, pull the the leg.
As for fun news, if a check is delayed, expect a massive class action suit for violation of the minimum wage law. The suit from 2013 is winding its way through the courts, and the Government keeps losing. The longer this goes on, the more employees fall into the class. The recovery, by the way, includes double pay for essential employees why were required to work and not paid in a timely manner, when their average pay dropped below the minimum wage. The longer it goes, the move, and higher paid, employees join the class.
Uh, last I checked, the Republicans control both houses of congress and the presidency. And what does the Democratic National Committee have to do with anything?
And I don't hate the Republicans, I just disagree with the awful, stupid things they do whenever they get the opportunity, like shutting down a big chunk of the government over a bullshit campaign chant that they, and you, know full well is bullshit.
-Doug in Oakland
Twasn't the Republicans that said 'There will be no wall". It was, IIRC, Chuck Schumer.
And, again, the Dems are just as willing to damage those Federal Workers as Trump by refusing to let a vote happen on a budget.
Neither side is clean here. Just be evenhanded in your criticism. THis is, at the final, a power play by both sides.
And while you may not hate the Republicans, lots of folks here hate Trump, but cannot apply the same reasons to hate to other politicians.
Increased border security yes. Maginot Lines no unless Mexico pays for it:
The line has since become a metaphor for expensive efforts that offer a false sense of security.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maginot_Line
Where did the 5 billion number come from ? Is it based on some kind of solid accounting estimate ? Tendered bids ?
On B's blog site, I listed several articles (after B asked for proof) from several different sources that document the government shutdown was initiated by and owned by Trump. While not directly denouncing them, it rather seems he chose to ignore those sources. Your can lead a horse to water.....
Dale
Er, B., the Democrats have never refused a vote. The Republicans, in the Senate, never brought the measure the House passed up to a vote, other than one that passes to allow amendment/discussion. Please explain why:
1) The Republican Senate passed a funding bill with Democrat support.
2) The Republican House refused to vote on the Senate bill without amendments that would not receive Democrat support.
3) The Republican House passed an amended funding bill without Democratic support.
4) The Republican Senate then voted to discuss and open for amendment the Hiuse bill, without Democratic support.
5) The Senate then refused to bring this bill up for a vote because they knew, without compromises to gain Democratic support, it would not pass.
So...Republicans had a party line bill that could not possibly win a vote in the Senate passed by the House. The Senate then never even tried, and this is all the Democrat’s fault? Tell me, B., please, how with these facts it’s the Democrats that shutdown the government because they wouldn’t cave and give the Republicans everything they want?
You claim a business background, B. Let’s say that your supplier tells you that the $5 widget you need for your product is now a $10 widget. Let’s also say that supplier number 2 has almost the same widget for $5, but you shutdown your business and cry it was supplier one’s fault you shutdown. Instead, compromise is either negotiating with supplier one and/or modifying your device to use widget 2.
For the same reason, ICE, DHS, Congressmen who have the border in their district, CBP and their agents all say that a “big, beautiful wall” is NOT the answer, that there are better ways to secure the border. Congressional Democrats have said, we’ll fund security via technology and other proven methods, we’ll fund maintenance, but not the new walls. Donnie’s response is to refuse to accept any compromise, no counter-offer, so once again, who shut this down?
Well, CP, you refuse to answer the question:
WHY do the DNC refuse any sort of wall/physical barrier? Or any border security for that matter? If they ahve a solution, then why haven't they implemented it??
Why do they want "technology" that does not stop anyone? (hint: No way for graft??) They promised "technology" back in Bush one's reign, and they lied then too.
A wall won't stop everyone. But it WILL stop many, if not most.
Walls work everywhere they are implemented. If they'd add that (unspecified) technology, then the Wall might even work better.
And that $10 Widget works, and the $5 widget doesn't (see also all the border security measures that have been implemented that don't deter anyone) then yes, I'd buy the $10 one.
And, again, Trump hasn't shut down the Federal Government, nor any part of it. He hasn't refused to sign any spending bills BECAUSE NO BILLS HAVE BEEN PRESENTED. He has promised to refuse to sign one without border wall funding, but none has been presented.
Schumer has stated "There Will Be No Wall" seems that he has drawn a line in the sand as well.
Blame both sides for this. A wall will help, if not stop, illegal immigration and drug smuggling. One side wants it, the other is vehemently opposed to it. We know why Trump wants it, Why is the DNC opposed to any sort of Wall?
And, if there are "better ways to secure the border", why aren't they funding them and implementing them? Why didn't they? Do they even want a secure border? If so, why haven't they secured it?
Dale: Your links were pretty much just words, but mostly just Op-Ed pieces. I don't think you even read them. I did. No facts. Facts matter, opinions by some internet hack don't. You wasted your time and mine with those articles.
“No bills have been presented to him” because McConnell will not do that without an assurance that Trump will sign them. The Senate has abrogated its constitutional duty and is acting as an appendage of Trump.
B, throwing the BS flag on you. All those sources were in the NEWS section of their respective web sites, NOT the Op-Ed pieces you claim. Facts are stubborn things, especially when they go against the position one has taken on any particular issue. You're better than that.
Dale
Riddle me this: Why is a conservative like the Aswan Dam?
Both are full of DeNile.
Dale: Didja READ those articles?
I did. News they were not. Feel free to post 'em here. They were Op-Ed labelled "News".
As you say, Facts are stubborn things. There were no facts in the articles you posted. Lots of opinion and innuendo though.
As a matter of FACT, yes I did read and watched the accompanying videos. You ask for me to post them here.
Well, here ya go.
On December 11th
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-meets-with-chuck-schumer-and-nancy-pelosi-as-shutdown-deadline-approaches-live-updates/
Article and video evidence of Trump stating he would shut down the government. FACT.
On December 19th:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/19/mcconnell-says-senate-will-introduce-a-short-term-bill-to-avoid-a-government-shutdown-.html
Article and Video report of proposed continuing resolution. FACT.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/12/19/senate-passes-stop-gap-spending-bill-to-avoid-shutdown-wall-fight/
Video of Senate passing Criminal Justice reform bill.
Article from Breitbart itself reporting of the continuing resolution being passed. FACT.
On December 20th:
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/donald-trump-wont-sign-temporary-spending-bill-over-border-wall-funding/
Article about Trump not signing bill with Video from Reuters. FACT.
On December 21st:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/21/us/politics/trump-shutdown-border-wall.html
Article about the government shut down taking effect. Video first shows Trump stating we are prepared for a very large shutdown, then explains what would and would not be affected. FACT.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-news-calls-out-trump-for-flipping-a-180-on-shutdown-blame
Article describes Fox News calling out Trump for blaming the Dems. Video is of Fox News doing just that. FACT.
On December 23rd:
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/23/government-shutdown-2018-trump-white-house-1074565
Article describes aides in the White House saying Trump is proud of the shutdown. Okay. I'll give you that one. Maybe it is innuendo by using un-named sources. Still, its 6-1 with FACTs if you're keeping score.
You can spout all you want about how unfairly Trump is being treated, how the Dems/liberals are all mad dogs. But as shown here and by others that use this site, your arguments are kinda weak when it is applied to what is happening with this president. Rush, Marc, FOX News, and the others you rehash is not reality. Try switching the stations.
Dale
None of which show how it is Trump's fault that we have a shutdown, nor do they mention the FACT that he has NOT YET BEEN PRESENTED WITH A BILL TO SIGN OR VETO.
Still waiting for that article that addresses *that* FACT (which was what my post was about). The articles you posted dance around the subject but, again, don't do more than dance around they are OP ed:(Blame Trump) with no facts as to why he is to blame.
For those interested enough, here is the blogpost for context:
https://middleoftheright.blogspot.com/2018/12/it-be-donnies-fault.html
Again: WHERE IS THE BILL FROM CONGRESS? Since no bill has been presented, how can you blame Donnie? (Hint: He folded last year...)...Since no bill has been presented for him to sign or veto, the blame is on our (current) legislators. Somehow you seem to be unable or unwilling to grasp that fact (You are pretty intelligent, so my vote goes for "unwilling" rather than "unable")
Four of them have been offered to him so far, and he has rejected all of them. That's where they are, B.
-Doug in Oakland
B., just to be clear, increased border enforcement has, and will continue to, increase unauthorized immigrants. Until Reagan and Co. increased the border enforcement, most “illegals” entered the country for some time, worked and then returned to Mexico. Perhaps returning and leaving several times over a number of years. With increased enforcement, they don’t risk leaving now.
So your plan will worsen the situation, sorry, facts are stubborn things.
If a Bill is approved by both Houses, it goes to the President. The Republican House refused to approve a Republican Senate Bill. The Republican Senate refuses to approve a Republican House Bill. And this is the Democrats fault?
CP: You make my point. However, according to Dinthebeast, Trump has refused 4 times to sign....? ....I cannot find anywhere where a bill was presented (for whatever reason) to Trump to veto/sign.
Therefore, as I have stated, it is the fault of the HOUSE to present a bill to the SENATE that they would approve, before sending said bill to the President for approval or veto...Which means, despite the headlines, that "Trump" has NOT "Shut Down The Government" ..."Iding millions of Government Workers and shutting down services"...But, rather, it is the Legislators who are responsible.
And, again, if everyone blames Trump for stating the he will not sign a bill that does not have funding for Border Security, why don't you blame our Legislators for refusing to provide funding for it? THey've promised it for nearly 20 years, and failed (both R and D) to provide any. Why?
You claim that border security prevents people from returning back home...How? The open border that we currently have allows passage both ways. In reality, it is easier to return to Mexico. One merely has to drive there...(what happens when you leave the US is not under the control of the US). But we will, as a country, gladly let you leave. There is no Berlin Wall type structure to keep those illegals in the US (Odd how well THAT wall worked, innit?)
B., the President doesn't get to demand stuff or else and skate on responsibility. When he states he will not sign X, and the REPUBLICAN leader of the House or Senate refuses to allow a vote on a bill, that is NOT the Democrat's fault. Now we have the House passing legislation, and the REPUBLICAN leader in the Senate won't allow a vote to get it to Donnie to sign...and that's the Democrat's fault too?!
A tougher enforcement on the border makes those who have entered remain due to the difficulty returning if they leave. And you still haven't answered why a wall that won't stop 40-50% of all entrants is a bofo idea. We've seen that Democrats are willing to fund maintenance and repair of the existing wall sections, generally located in denser, urban areas, where such an artifact can work...but they also recommend a guest worker program that would solve a lot of the issues too, along with that wall work.
By the way, in 2005, 36% of "illegal" immigrants stayed for 5 years or less...now it's 18%. The numbers for 10 years or more are 38% and 66%. Border crossing have trended down for yeas and are now at 45 year lows. We are building our own little underclass...people that Donnie's managers can hire cheaply and provide fake documents for.
Would you like to guess how much GDP the "wall" has cost in the Valley and Southern California? Billions, not to mention the $12-15 Billion a year that flows into Social Security due to fake accounts used by illegals. The costs to build and maintain the wall are huge too, as are the resulting pockets of poverty on the U.S. side that will need aide and on the Mexican side that will encourage migrants. Oh, did I mention the U.S. demand for drugs? Want less crime, stop the drugs that fly in (avoids any way), float in (avoids anty wall), are tossed in (over any wall) and tunnel in (up to 70' deep, where the wall protects exactly 6' deep).
Where do you get your numbers for the "reduction" in border crossings? (I'm not saying you are lying, I think you believe what you are stating here... I'd just like to know how those were derived), and how do you figure that a Wall will not stop *half* of the current border crossers from walking across our border? (Note that I am referring to those who simply march across, not those who fly or boat in)
And, again, if we had done more than pay lip service to the concept of a border security for the past 30+ years, we'd not have all those Billions of dollars of fraud by our current crop of illegals. And how has the (nonexistent) wall cost Billions of dollars in communities? What costs are you referring to? What "pockets of poverty" has the (not yet built) wall caused?
And if you are worried about the cost, then why are we spending many times the cost to GIVE money to other countries? That money will not fix the issues that the illegal invaders are trying to escape, nor fix the Fraud they will perpetrate to get Free Shit once they arrive....
Why is it, if walls don't work, that other countries have fences and/or walls across their borders? Why do most politicians live behind walls surrounding their properties? Why do we have fences and walls around military and secure government installations? Please, explain how those don't work, yet they are built and maintained by the entities wanting security for those facilities?
And, even if people stay longer, at some point STOPPING new arrivals will cause a reduction in the number of illegals residing in this country. We may not be able to fix the issue we have now, but we can fix the future.
And, again, why do you blame the President for sticking to his guns, but not the Dems for sticking to theirs for the shutdown? Kinda double standard there, doncha think? Both sides are at fault for failing to come up with a solution. The Dems are adamant "There Will Be No Wall"... Trump compromised last time (hell, he folded), and was promised border security next time.... We got none. They lied. Why won't they give? WHY ARE THEY SO AGAINST A SECURE (by whatever means) BORDER?
According to our Fearless leader, the Mexican “invaders” are rapists and drug dealers. Glad he’ keep those professions American when the wall gets built.
I'm seeing a pattern in the comments. I'm hearing If a person doesn't agree with my solution then they are against any solution for the issue at hand.
Isn't the correct response to anyone not agreeing with a specific solution to ask the question What is an alternative solution?
I vote to see how the facts play out. Emotional responses to Real Life Issues never turns out for the good of all and may it harm none.
At least not that I've witnessed.
I do have an opinion on border issues. I'm in favor of visiting worker visas and daily passes with careful records keeping. But then I'm also rather in favor of our country making money instead of losing it.
B., try FactCheck.org, using CBP data:
https://www.factcheck.org/2018/04/the-stats-on-border-apprehensions/
Lip service, huh? So, instead, we’ll spend more between 2019 and 2023 than we’ve spend in the last 60 years?.
And while you’re at it, here’s a nice explanation of the circular flow we’ve fucked up:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3407978/
Since arrests are a proxy for determine border crossings, per CBP, the above FactCheck.org link will also indicate that Bill Clinton’s administration was much more serious about the border than any of the Republicans...but that’s an artifact of the poverty in Central America and the economic expansion in the U.S. that is often the character of a Democratic Administration, not so much the Republican Administrations (Any rational stock investor should be a fan of Democratic Presidents, as the yearly average return is 10.83% under Democrats and 1.71% under Republicans).
"arrests are a proxy for determine(sic) border crossings"
Except they are not, really. Apprehensions are, at best also influences by where and when the patrols happen, how much pursuit is allowed, how many folks cry ":foul" when someone is injured during that apprehension (influences future apprehensions) etc.
It isn't even a decent "Proxy". It is wishful thinking, and part of a twisted bunch of statistics like "Proxies" in Glowbal Warmenating arguments. Flawed reasoning at best. No one , not you, not me, not any government agent knows how many folks cross (in any direction) illegally. No points awarded. Your arguments are eroding in quality and rationality here. Either come up with real numbers (and an unbiased source (FactCheck is about as reliable as Snopes for unbiased data) or your argument is called as invalid. The page you offered is poorly argued, and only believed by those who:A, Agree with what is postulated, and B. Apparently cannot use logic and C. don't understand the difference between facts and opinion. Attempting to conflate "apprehensions" and "crossings" without correlating other factors is foolish and disingenuous. You are better than that.
Post a Comment