Words of Advice:

"If Something Seems To Be Too Good To Be True, It's Best To Shoot It, Just In Case." -- Fiona Glenanne

Flying the Airplane is More Important than Radioing Your Plight to a Person on the Ground Who is Incapable of Understanding or Doing Anything About It." -- Unknown

"There seems to be almost no problem that Congress cannot, by diligent efforts and careful legislative drafting, make ten times worse." -- Me

"What the hell is an `Aluminum Falcon'?" -- Emperor Palpatine

"Eck!" -- George the Cat

Saturday, December 22, 2018

World's Oldest Tweener Shuts Down Part of the Government

Let's be clear about this: Trump shut down part of the Federal government because people on his favorite TV channel were saying bad things about him. The professionals working the problem had reached a deal on a continuing resolution, which Trump had agreed to.

But then the little images on his TV said nasty things about him and the deal blew up.


B said...

Or, one could say the Dems "shut down the government" (a small part of it, anyway) because they have stated that there will be no border wall. They are being as stubborn as he is. Why don't you blame them as well?

The current Senate just gave *twice* the amount needed for the wall to Mexico and countries south of there in "economic aid".

Why are both parties so against more effective border security? Keeping illegal immigrants and drugs out of our country?

I hope he stands fast on this issue. It should have been taken care of in the first year.

Comrade Misfit said...

Saying that the Dems are at fault is revisionism.

Trump: "I am proud to shut down the government for border security, Chuck, because the people of this country don’t want criminals and people that have lots of problems and drugs pouring into our country. So I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down. I’m not going to blame you for it. The last time you shut it down, it didn’t work. I will take the mantle of shutting down."

AC2usn said...

It is a manufactured issue. There are currently fewer illegal immigrants from all sources (expired visas, etc.) than yesterday, five years ago, ten years ago... If we would properly fund and staff the legal immigration process the legal administrative lines would become timewise reasonable.


B P said...

Disagreeing with the content of a Trump statement, and a prospective one at that, is now "revisionism"? Trump's statement proved wrong. That should not be a difficult concept for anyone. He said he was going to do something, and then someone else went and did it instead. I get that his preemptive claim of responsibility is a major left talking point but that doesn't make it true.

Trump was going to veto any bill without the wall funding. That would've made it his shutdown. It could still happen; the shutdown is 100% his from then on. Currently, he hasn't voted on, or vetoed, anything in the process. What he has done is exert political pressure, as much as he can, in a manner which I have no doubt played a part in preventing a clean and timely Republican surrender on the matter. But the responsibility for not passing a given Bill falls directly on Congress. It is factually and directly their omission. Where in Congress you want to allocate proximate cause, who you want to blame, is a subjective call. Who was on the membership rolls is not. Trump isn't a member of Congress, so he didn't have a direct hand in the failure to produce a bill. He pressed for something that made it more likely to occur. That is attenuated causation. Congress is, nominally, staffed by adults and adults are responsible for their own actions or inaction.

We can credit Trump for a publicly announced planned shutdown of the government, even accessory to shutdown of the government, but the deed itself belongs to Congress, Trump's claim to the contrary notwithstanding. So, I'm not going to write Trump a letter thanking him for the shutdown. He hasn't earned it yet.

Eck! said...

Both sides are in full agreement for border security the difference is a 5 billion
dollar wall and a lessor amount for CBP, security systems, and immigration reform.

The wall is a stupid ass effort to stop crossing where once across the system is
very broken for how to mange the immigration and migrant workers.

To me it seems we should want them legally here and paying taxes.

As to the close the government... it solely on p-trump as he wanted it.


Dark Avenger said...

As a loyal Democrat, I feverently hope your scenario comes true, B.

DTWND said...

Bert and Bradley, Congress had agreed to a continuing resolution to keep the country funded and operating into February. While first indicating his intent to sign, he reversed course after howls from Fox News, among others. This IS the Trump Shutdown.

By the way, are we “great” yet? If not, how much longer?


CenterPuke88 said...

B., why do we blame Trump?

Trump’s party controls the House and the Senate. In the Senate, Trump’s Majority Leader has stated he will not kill the filibuster rule, therefore They need at least 9 Democratic votes in the Senate. Trump continues to meet with Republican leaders and tweet at the Democrats. Trump demands the Democrats meet his funding demand ($5B), but offers nothing in return. Democrats offer between $1.3B and $1.6B, Trump makes no counter and simply says no, after first saying yes, confusing his own Congressional leaders.

Trump claimed the mantle of the shutdown last week...Trump changed the agreement he had with his Congressional leaders before Thursday...Trump demands that Democrats give him the funding, period. Guess who owns the shutdown.

As a bonus, how does this advance Donnie’s goals? In a couple of weeks, the House majority is Democratic and the Senate will still need 7 Democratic votes to advance matters. If Donnie pushes too hard, I could see a veto override from the next Congress as moderate Republicans join Democrats to get the Government open.

B said...

Schumer says no more than 1.6 Billion. He's willing to go to shutdown over it too.


He wants us to "abandon the Wall" if we want funding for the (less than) 25% of the unfunded government.


So he and his party are JUST as complicit as Donnie.

I'd say this is now just a pissing match.

Again, *why* are they willing to GIVE better than $10 Billion to those southern governments, but are unwilling to build a wall. It won't be 100% effective, but it will greatly slow the flow of illegal (and unwanted by most US citizens) immigrants and drugs across the Mexican border. But if you think a barrier won't greatly help, start leaving your car and home and locker at the gym unlocked all the time.

Methinks the Dems (and some R's) have a reason they want all those illegals here.

This could have, and should have, been solved preciously.

Dark Avenger said...


CenterPuke88 said...

Stop that $10B and see what happens. Schumer has no reason to offer anything above that until Trimmp budges from his $5B demand. The onus is on Donnie.

CenterPuke88 said...

Damn keyboards...oh well. Try this, you want a Happy Meal, cost $5...you are offered a McDouble, value $1.30...you stomp your feet and demand the Happy Meal. Please explain how this will work to your advantage.

Glenn Kelley said...

If you don't want drugs crossing your borders get rid of the laws that make it profitable to smuggle drugs . It's not like they have reduced drug use .

B said...

Thanks for recognizing a typo.

Why not fund the wall? WHAT DOES Schumer and the DNC have against a secure border?

Or do they WANT the illegals to continue to come in?

Again, they've spent more than the total cost of the border giving gifts to other countries. (not just our southern neighbors either).
They've fought border security for YEARS. Nearly as long as I can remember. Why? They've promoted illegal immigration (especially latinos) for just as long....WHY?

It's an honest question.

CenterPuke88 said...

B., your position is that we much fund the wall because of illegal entrants, right?

Since about half of illegal entrants come from those overstaying their visitor visas, why aren’t we worried about that? Is it because Accenture holds the contract (look up their contributions) and Congress won’t approve funds to fix a system that has been repeatedly recognized as broken since 2004?

So the net migration of illegals is negative since 2008-2009, border crossings have been falling for decades, and NOW we need to destroy biomes and confiscate private property to build a “wall”. So a 10 foot wall isn’t good enough because a 12 foot ladder and a rope beats it? OK, how about a 35 foot ladder and a rope for this vaunted 30 foot wall? Unless you station personnel all along the wall, it is defeatable, and the cost of stationing is prohibitive. Why not spend the money on a system that accurately determines a persons legal ability to hold a job...maybe because business doesn’t really want that?

Oh, I still want to know why we have to budget for it if Mexico is paying.

B said...

Hey, CP, I could get behind your suggestion.

Say a database wherein one puts in a SSN and gets back a name and photo? (perhaps the login is the EIN number, so that is trackable)...

If the pic doesn't even come close to the person presenting the ID, then the onus is on the employer....and fines to the business that make it prohibitive to employ them even if the pay is really low...

But, again, why do you say walls won't work? They do. everywhere they are employed across the world. Much better than the "Border Security" we have now. cameras and motion detectors...A border wall and a cleared space on the US side will do more than we have now. (I'd prefer a moat with alligators followed by a minefield, but I am somewhat focused on results)

Walls won't stop everyone, but they will stop most. What biome will be destroyed? Desert?That's a nice claim, but it doesn't hold up. It's been used to hold up stuff for years. But you and I both know it is bullshit. It will quickly recover from the construction.
The trails and trash left behind by the smugglers and human piss and shit do more damage than a one time wall construction.