POLITICS Border Wall / Gub-mint Shutdown

Discussion in 'Politicants' started by Tenacious D, Dec 11, 2018.

  1. VolDad

    VolDad Super Moderator

    I have not reversed anything. You looked at a video of men, women, and children and said - It is crazy, but I can't help but notice that they don't look like violent criminals/rapists.

    I asked what do violent criminals and rapist look like?

    In stead of saying, You know, you are right. You can't tell by looking at someone if they are criminals or rapist

    You chose the route, Voldad sees rapist and criminals everywhere.
  2. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    I get that this is how it appears, but Trump has actually been consistently vocal and positively clear in telling anyone who would listen that he was not going to sign another Omnibus Bill to finance the government unless it also included funding for the wall.

    Go back to the last Omnibus Bill he signed in 2018, which funded the government for the remaining fiscal year of 2018, and was set to expire in September.

    There was legitimate fear that he wouldn't sign the last one in 2018, particularly when he tweeted this:
    Here's the unedited tweet:

    Even way back in March 2018 - some nine (9) months before this current shut down, I don't know how much more clearly certain he could have been, than this:

    Even further, as that Omnibus Spending Bill was set to expire in September of 2018, Trump signed several "minibus" bills, so as to fund the federal government through Dec. 21, 2018. This averted a shutdown of the federal government, and gave Congress the time and opportunity to include border wall funding into the full Omnibus Spending Bill for 2019 - and again threatened to veto it, if it was sent without it.

    Not only did Trump do everything reasonable to prevent the shutdown, it should be noted that he is the first POTUS to sign a spending bill prior to the end of the fiscal year in more than a decade.

    This is not a new development, by any means. His opponents obviously believed that Trump was bluffing, and that when push came to shove, that he'd sign it anyway.

    As in almost every other major decision, they've badly erred in assuming that Trump wouldn't actually do exactly what he has consistently said he'd do. (As far back in March of 2018, at least, in this case). And he's again proven that he can be trusted to do what he says that he will do.

    Now, as to your question regarding why the Republican-controlled Congress didn't include border wall funding in any Omnibus Bill in the two (2) previous years when they enjoyed majorities in both Houses? I'd say that's a damned outstanding question, Card.

    Why do you (or anyone else) think that the GOP didn't put in any border wall funding in those two years? Is there even more than one obvious answer available?

    I'd also say that the answer to that question speaks loudly to the question as to why so many rank and file Republican constituency is just as distrustful of their own Party as they are of the Dems.

    I do not believe that Trump is dug in because he thinks it politically advantageous (although his approval ratings are remarkably consistent....although I'm sure that everyone will prognosticate that they will soon plummet....and I hope that they hold their breaths while awaiting it), necessarily, but because he wants the southern border secured, and the border wall funded. I personally think he sees it as a matter of national security, is confident that he's been clearly fair in warning of his resolve in getting it funded, that neither the Dems nor GOPe are acting in good faith to build any compromise, and that if he can't get Congress to secure the border now, that the American people - a majority of whom agree with his beliefs on securing the southern border - will never have any hope of getting it done, later.

    Simply, if there is ever to be any hope that our broken immigration system can be fixed - necessarily starting with the securing of the southern border, and then DACA. H-1B visas, lottery migration, chain migration, anchor babies, etc. - Trump is going to have to do it. I think he really, sincerely, honest-to-goodness believes that - and I not only strongly agree with him, but support his efforts toward that end, and with equal vigor and strength.

    So, he's going to ride it out, seeing neither any reason nor help in doing otherwise. Surely, what some see as foolish, others say is madness, and vice versa.

    We'll see how it plays out.

    (All emphasis is mine)

  3. JayVols

    JayVols Walleye Catchin' Moderator

    I've always been in the "minority" here. Has never bothered me. Still doesn't. But I fear there's more going on here.

    I always thought that there wasn't that much daylight between any of us. We simply had different views on things. No big deal, but I'm starting to fear that I was wrong. I'm sure I'm part of the "problem", but there's not just simple disagreements anymore. There's completely different worldviews. I'd love to be wrong, but the longer whatever this "thing" is goes on, it seems there is a real conflict of worlds.

    I'm not condemning or condoning anything by saying that. It's just becoming clearer by the day. I have more flaws than I can count, but not standing up for what I believe in my heart is just and right regardless the headwinds is NOT one of them.
  4. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    As a Trump supporter, I feel confident that if the Federal government can function in the absence of all of these employees for a period of thirty (30) consecutive days, that they were unnecessary, and simply need to be terminated and not replaced.

    Shut down would then be immediately over, and Bob's your Uncle.
  5. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    He's already signed several interim spending bills, and Congress isn't even willing to negotiate.

    Are you just writing fan fiction, now?
  6. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    This is my all-time favorite post.
  7. JayVols

    JayVols Walleye Catchin' Moderator

    Killing the patient to "cure" cancer.

  8. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

  9. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    6-years old:
  10. NorrisAlan

    NorrisAlan Super Moderator

    No, I don't write fan fiction. Not intentionally. There was a resolution that passed the Senate 100-0 and everyone had been told the President was going to sign it. People were flying out of DC for the Christmas break.

    Trump then did a 180, reportedly because Limbaugh and others were lambasting him for caving in.
  11. CardinalVol

    CardinalVol Uncultured, non-diverse mod

    To the extent that no one saw this coming - because he likes to talk a big game to score brownie points. Cried wolf one too many times? Maybe. At some point when you make EVERYTHING a major deal that you talk in big overtures about, everything becomes normal. There was zero indication leading up to the omnibus signing that he wasn't going to do it until he didn't.

    Now, I am 100% behind border security and taking long hard looks at immigration laws. I'm still not sure of the good or bad a wall will do other than to be a big wall there symbolically, and at which point there will be a million different ways the symbol will be interpreted.

    As to why no one wants to deal with it? Hispanic voting block is growing too rapidly and legal and illegal immigrants have been tied together as one and too many view it as all. That's how it's painted and how too many view it.

    The economy falls on the President, rightly or wrongly. If he wants to hold out over this too long, it's a major, major gamble.
  12. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    Lots to criticize as to his general bombastic style, general tone and tenor, and modus operandi, for sure.

    But on this, he’s on record as far back as 10 months ago as saying he wouldn’t sign another Omnibus without wall funding, and again repeated the exact same request when he signed the minibuses back in September to avoid a shut-down and give Congress another chance to include it. When Ryan delivered the next Omnibus to him in December, and it contained no wall funding, he immediately refused to sign it.

    I’m not sure how he could have done so any sooner, before it arrived, or how much more clear he could have possibly been, and for months.

    Agreed on both economy and the gamble. I just don’t think he sees it as being anything but necessary, himself having made three major concessions (Omnibus 2018, reducing amount from $25B to $5B and signing minibus deals in September), and with a complete unwillingness to do anything from the Dems & other opposition.
  13. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    He said he wouldn’t sign it 10 months before, when signing the 2018 Omnibus.

    He again repeated that refusal 7 months later, prior to signing several minibuses to keep the government open, and to give Congress more time. This was also three (3) months before the final refusal when the Omnibus passed Congress but still contained no wall funding.

    He refused to sign the 2019 Omnibus Bill immediately upon Ryan’s delivering it to the WH, and mere hours after it had passed both Houses.

    You shouldn’t need to strain so hard to find some reason to be critical of Trump. And you shouldn’t need 1/10th of this evidence to admit your error on this point.

    But I can’t defend Trump sticking to his guns and then criticize you for the same. You’re just wrong, on this.
  14. NorrisAlan

    NorrisAlan Super Moderator

    Then it is very odd that the bill passed 100-0 in the Senate and even the Republican Senators were leaving town.

    And I take any statements made by Trump as simply flash in the pan words. He will change it 10 minutes later or contradict what he said 100 times over. But I admit, you probably read and watch more Trump stuff in a day than I do in a week, and will admit that he said the things you are quoting.

    But I find it odd his own party seemed 100% assured he was going to sign the bill and were packing their bags for Christmas.
  15. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    His Party “brethren” in Congress want a wall about as much as you do.
  16. TennTradition

    TennTradition Super Moderator

    He can shit up about Chuck and Nancy then.

    He had two years of both houses and he passed a corporate tax cut.
  17. emainvol

    emainvol Administrator

    I agree that white men are more likely to commit violent crimes than illegal immigrants, yes.
  18. justingroves

    justingroves supermod

    I think this is an obvious yes
  19. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    It isn’t functioning in the ABSENSE of them. They are there, and not being paid.

    There are some that are absent. Truly shut it down and then see whose uncle you are taking to... when random person A walks into the Oval Office because there are no secret service agents.
  20. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    I’m stealing “shit up”.
    warhammer likes this.

Share This Page