To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Right? Left? Centre?
Political news and debate.
Put your views and articles up for debate and destruction!
Post Reply
User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 9555
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Econoline »

liberty wrote:This is a Democrat government shut down. The Democrats are not willing to spend five billion dollars to open the government; hell I bet they waste more than that on corruption. That is pocket change for the federal government.
I wrote this elsewhere, as a comment on someone's Facebook page:
  • The way this is *SUPPOSED* to work:

    (1) Trump and /or the Republicans in Congress offer something tangible that Democrats want in exchange for 5.7 gigabucks in funding for the wall. (1A) Negotiations as to what Rs are willing to give and what Ds are willing to accept.

    (2) If the Democrats accept, then some Congresscritter(s) write a CR to open the government with *BOTH* of those conditions (the Tangible Concession for the Ds and the $ for the wall) attached.

    (3) Both Houses of Congress pass the bill.

    (4) Trump signs it. [(4A) Optional: Everyone sings Kumbaya.]

    NOTE: This cannot happen without *ALL FOUR* steps being completed, and thus far neither Trump nor any other Republican has even started on the first step.


Also, see the links in Sue's post (above) explaining why the wall is not feasible—neither from an engineering standpoint nor from a constitutional/legal standpoint. So even *IF* the Democrats got something as part of the deal, the $5.7 billion would essentially be wasted, just an offering given to Trump to assuage his ego, and it would accomplish nothing of real value.
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 16540
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Scooter »

Image
"If you don't have a seat at the table, you're on the menu."

-- Author unknown

User avatar
Bicycle Bill
Posts: 9015
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:10 pm
Location: Surrounded by Trumptards in Rockland, WI – a small rural village in La Crosse County

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Bicycle Bill »

Is this like voting for "American Idol"?  How much does each call cost?
Maybe THIS is how Trump intends to pay for his wall.....
Image
-"BB"-
Yes, I suppose I could agree with you ... but then we'd both be wrong, wouldn't we?

User avatar
RayThom
Posts: 8604
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 4:38 pm
Location: Longwood Gardens PA 19348

To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by RayThom »

Bicycle Bill wrote:... How much does each call cost?...
(1) 800 Phone Numbers Are Free:
Toll-free codes – 800, 888, 877, 866, 855, and 844. ... Although 800, 888, 877, 866, 855 and 844 are all toll-free codes, they are not interchangeable. Dialing a number using a 1-800 prefix would reach a different recipient than dialing that number using a 1-888 prefix.

However, this could be a scam by its creator to find out what private phone numbers are active.
Image
“In a world whose absurdity appears to be so impenetrable, we simply must reach a greater degree of understanding among us, a greater sincerity.” 

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 9555
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Econoline »

Found this on Facebook, where it was quoted without attribution. (I found another version in a meme that attributed it to Dan Rather, but could find no evidence that it was Rather who wrote it.)
  • Mr. President, you can have your wall.

    You can get it the same way that President Obama got Obamacare; the way Lyndon Johnson got Medicare; the way Franklin Roosevelt got Social Security.

    In each case the president had a project he wanted enacted; so his administration crafted a bill. That bill went to Congress where committee hearings were held; amendments were proposed; studies were conducted that tested the cost, effectiveness etc. of the proposal; testimony was held in Congress; debate ensued and if the measure had enough support, a vote was taken and the measure was passed.

    That's how you legislate. It takes hard work, planning and the ability to actually negotiate. Your pet project doesn't get to leap frog over the pathway laid out by the Constitution and 250 years of precedent. You have chosen to skip over this entire process (even when you had majorities in both Houses) and have resorted instead to taking the American public hostage in exchange for your wall.

    You want a wall? Put down the gun you are holding to the head of the American people and get to work.
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

liberty
Posts: 4408
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 5:31 pm
Location: Colonial Possession

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by liberty »

Sue U wrote:Regardless of whether you believe we are being overrun by an invasion of criminal hordes of swarthy Spanishes, Trump's wall can never be built: it is simply not feasible from an engineering standpoint, and it is not feasible from a constitutional/legal standpoint. It is a simplistic and profoundly stupid concept aimed at simple and profoundly stupid people, and it has been a sham and a con from Day One. You know what $5 billion would buy? Clean drinking water for Flint, MI and then some. If it's such a trivial amount of money, why don't we spend it there?

Bullshit and bullshit, walls do work. A wall is a barrier and barriers work. Why do you think we use them on the battlefield to decorate the scenery? If you don’t believe in walls dear down the walls on your property. Why don’t you live in a tent?

And how in hell is building a wall unconstitutional?
I expected to be placed in an air force combat position such as security police, forward air control, pararescue or E.O.D. I would have liked dog handler. I had heard about the dog Nemo and was highly impressed. “SFB” is sad I didn’t end up in E.O.D.

User avatar
Joe Guy
Posts: 13927
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:40 pm
Location: Redweird City, California

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Joe Guy »

liberty wrote:.....Why do you think we use them on the battlefield to decorate the scenery?.....
I don't know why they use walls on the battlefield to decorate the scenery. That wouldn't be my first choice. I'd go with some flower arrangements...

Burning Petard
Posts: 4050
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Near Bear, Delaware

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Burning Petard »

POYUS has spoken. He presented his solution for this terrible humanitarian crisis on hour Southern Border. He began with a very inclusive statement about citizen ship is significant in this country and every citizen must be respected, with out regard to ethnic background. I guess he has forgotten his own exception to this principle if the citizen has a name that seems Hispanic and the citizen is a judge presiding over a claim of fraud agains Trump University.

He indicated little regard for the American citizens who have been hit in the paycheck by this "partial government shutdown."

Maybe the physical barriers on our Southern border need expansion and enhancement. If so, why does POTUS continue with such bogus data and irrational justifications?

Just this week some people dug a tunnel under one of these constructed barriers, near Yuma Arizona and more than 300 people crossed 'under' the barrier and immediately came in mass directly to the nearest border guard station. This was no attempt to smuggle or hide anything.

snailgate.

User avatar
Bicycle Bill
Posts: 9015
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:10 pm
Location: Surrounded by Trumptards in Rockland, WI – a small rural village in La Crosse County

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Bicycle Bill »

liberty wrote:Bullshit and bullshit, walls do work. A wall is a barrier and barriers work. Why do you think we use them on the battlefield to decorate the scenery?
Walls do work, no argument there; but only in the short term.  Every wall ever built, whether it was to keep people out (the walls of Jericho; the Great Wall of China; the Maginot Line; Hitler''s 'Atlantic Wall') or to hold them in (the Berlin Wall, POW camp barriers, even prison walls like at the Bastille or Alcatraz) has eventually been breached or bypassed.
liberty wrote:If you don’t believe in walls dear down the walls on your property. Why don’t you live in a tent?
Just for the record, most of the walls we erect to create our housing are made to keep animals and the elements out, not necessarily people, or to ensure privacy so that no one has to see you jerking off to your gun magazines, conservative claptrap, and "Women of the NRA" centerfolds.  And as someone wiser than I once noted, locks — even the cybernetic ones like passwords, two-stage verification, and encryption — exist only to keep honest people honest.  Anyone who really wants to get into Sue U's house, or steal my bike, or hack your bank account will do it ... locks, walls, security systems, et cetera be damned.
Image
-"BB"-
Yes, I suppose I could agree with you ... but then we'd both be wrong, wouldn't we?

ex-khobar Andy
Posts: 5419
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2015 4:16 am
Location: Louisville KY as of July 2018

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by ex-khobar Andy »

I remember when Trump told Bill O'Reilly (remember him? Whatever happened to the no spin guy?) that the 14th amendment (that's the one about automatic citizenship for anyone born in the USA) is unconstitutional. You have to admit that it takes a certain level of lateral thinking to determine that the constitution is unconstitutional. But I suppose most of us just laughed (I'm pretty sure I did) because obviously someone so idiotic could never make it to the presidency, so it really didn't matter what some random wacko thought.

liberty
Posts: 4408
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 5:31 pm
Location: Colonial Possession

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by liberty »

Joe Guy wrote:
liberty wrote:.....Why do you think we use them on the battlefield to decorate the scenery?.....
I don't know why they use walls on the battlefield to decorate the scenery. That wouldn't be my first choice. I'd go with some flower arrangements...
That is why we win!
I expected to be placed in an air force combat position such as security police, forward air control, pararescue or E.O.D. I would have liked dog handler. I had heard about the dog Nemo and was highly impressed. “SFB” is sad I didn’t end up in E.O.D.

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 9555
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Econoline »

Trump mentions San Antonio in comments about success of walls - there is no wall around San Antonio


Also: Where I live there are a lot of corn, soybeans, and Trump supporters. I've yet to see or hear of any of those Trump-supporting farmers who has built a wall around his acreage.
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

Burning Petard
Posts: 4050
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Near Bear, Delaware

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Burning Petard »

Again--this time when I am in a more reflective mood, my mind not so chaotic from trying to immediately follow the thinking of POTUS.

Perhaps there are good reasons for improving the physical barriers along the Southern border of the USA. There objectively seems to be serious problems handling the people coming across that line and attempting to follow the USA and international rules for asylum. Large quantities of contraband are entering the USA across that line.

Why are not those reasons discussed? Why instead does POTUS present bogus stuff, like this San Antonio wall? And why do GOP Senators and Congress critters like the majority leader Mitch McConnell or 'Calf muscles the size of melons' Congressman Steve King bob their heads and say 'you are so correct, Sir'?

When the public justifications for actions and policy statements are so consistently contrary to reality, what is going on? Paul Krugman explains it as fanatical adherence to dogma, combined with simple incompetence. Is that it? Is there a kinder, gentler explanation?

snailgate

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Lord Jim »

He indicated little regard for the American citizens who have been hit in the paycheck by this "partial government shutdown."
Actually, I believe he indicated no regard for them; they weren't even mentioned.

The speech was of course loaded up with the usual lurid fear mongering, (the bit about mothers giving their female children birth control pills for the trip to the border was nice new touch) made up statistics, (and other statistics that may not have been made up, but don't make his case...the total number of people in this country who die annually from drug overdoses is pretty disconnected from whether or not we a have a wall on our southern border) misleading anecdotes, (the case of the police officer murdered by an illegal alien the day after Christmas is a tragedy and an outrage, but it doesn't change the statistical fact that illegal immigrants commit violent crimes in this country at a lower rate than natural born citizens) and absurd assertions (at one point he even said that his wall could cut US crime rates in half :roll: )

However, all of that having been said, if you strip all that crap away (and of course his callous failure to even acknowledge the hardships being faced by the hundreds of thousands of federal employees and their families who have now gone a full month without being paid) and just look at what he is putting on the table, I think the Democrats may be making a political mistake to simply reject it out of hand...

I've gone through the text of his speech and taken out just the parts that describe exactly what he is proposing (yes, it was a painful exercise):
Our plan includes the following: $800 million in urgent humanitarian assistance; $805 million for drug detection technology to help secure our ports of entry; an additional 2,750 border agents and law enforcement professionals; 75 new immigration judge teams to reduce the court backlog of, believe it or not, almost 900,000 cases. However, the whole concept of having lengthy trials for anyone who sets one foot in our country unlawfully must be changed by Congress. It is unsustainable. It is ridiculous. Few places in the world would even consider such an impossible nightmare.

Our plan includes critical measures to protect migrant children from exploitation and abuse. This includes a new system to allow Central American minors to apply for asylum in their home countries, and reform to promote family reunification for unaccompanied children, thousands of whom wind up on our border doorstep.

To physically secure our border, the plan includes $5.7 billion for a strategic deployment of physical barriers, or a wall. This is not a 2,000-mile concrete structure from sea to sea. These are steel barriers in high-priority locations. Much of the border is already protected by natural barriers such as mountains and water. We already have many miles of barrier, including 115 miles that we are currently building or under contract. It will be done quickly. Our request will add another 230 miles. [To the best of my knowledge, this is the first time that Trump has offered any specificity as to what exactly that 5.7 billion is supposed to pay for.]

...Furthermore, in order to build the trust and goodwill necessary to begin real immigration reform, there are two more elements to my plan. Number one is three years of legislative relief for 700,000 DACA recipients brought here unlawfully by their parents at a young age many years ago. This extension will give them access to work permits, Social Security numbers, and protection from deportation, most importantly.

Secondly, our proposal provides a three-year extension of Temporary Protected Status, or TPS. This means that 300,000 immigrants whose protected status is facing expiration will now have three more years of certainty so that Congress can work on a larger immigration deal, which everybody wants -- Republicans and Democrats.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/ ... xt-1116059

Notably missing from this are the ante-upping demands about ending chain migration and immigration lotteries that tanked the last attempt at an agreement.

I think a lot people, (including folks who may not be big fans of building a wall, or fans of Trump) will look at that and think things like:

"Well, all things considered, that really doesn't look all that unreasonable. Maybe out of our 2000 mile border, there's an additional 230 miles where building a physical barrier might make sense, and while he's not offering a permanent solution on DACA or TPS, this would at least protect them and prevent them from being used as political pawns through the balance of his term as President. This isn't ideally what I would like, and it's not a long term solution, but at least the he's showing some willingness to compromise by providing incentives. The Democrats should at least be willing to talk about it. "

If the Democrats just reflexively declare this a non-starter, (as they appear to be doing now) I believe they run a very real danger of letting Trump look like the one who is willing to compromise while they are absolutely unmovable, and that could well lead to the advantage they have had in polls about who is blamed for the shutdown begin to turn...

In fact this proposal so doesn't look all that unreasonable, that the high profile race and xenophobe baiters lost no time denouncing it:
Immigration hardliners blast Trump's shutdown deal offer

Immigration hardliners on Saturday afternoon blasted President Donald Trump's proposed deal to end the government shutdown, attacking his offer of temporary protection for some undocumented immigrants in exchange for border wall funding.

Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) tweeted: "A Big Beautiful Concrete Border Wall will be a monument to the Rule of Law, the sovereignty of the USA, & @realDonaldTrump. If DACA Amnesty is traded for $5.7 billion(1/5 of a wall), wouldn’t be enough illegals left in America to trade for the remaining 4/5. NO AMNESTY 4 a wall!"

“100 miles of border wall in exchange for amnestying millions of illegals. So if we grant citizenship to a BILLION foreigners, maybe we can finally get a full border wall,” tweeted conservative media commentator Ann Coulter, who has repeatedly antagonized the president for failing to erect a barrier along the U.S.-Mexico border during his two years in office.

“Trump proposes amnesty. We voted for Trump and got Jeb!” Coulter added, referring to Trump’s 2016 GOP primary rival, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who has previously criticized the president’s immigration rhetoric.

Tom Fitton, president of the right-wing activist group Judicial Watch, also denounced Trump’s proposal, tweeting that the overture to Democrats “will encourage more illegal immigration and undermine the rule of law.”

“Amnesty is not a good plan, @realDonaldTrump,” Fitton wrote online.

Roy Beck, president of the anti-immigration organization NumbersUSA, called the president’s offer “a loser for the forgotten American workers who were central to his campaign promises.”

Roy Beck, president of the anti-immigration organization NumbersUSA, called the president’s offer “a loser for the forgotten American workers who were central to his campaign promises.”

“An amnesty-for-wall trade would once again reward previous immigration lawbreakers without preventing future immigration lawbreakers,” Beck said in a statement. “This kind of amnesty deal will incentivize more caravans, more illegal border crossers and more visa overstayers at the expense of the most vulnerable American workers who have to compete with the illegal labor force."

“Trading amnesty for future promises of enforcement is always a bad deal,” said RJ Hauman, government relations director at the Federation for American Immigration Reform. “Trading just a quarter of what you want for a couple Democrat amnesty priorities? Even worse. You must trade statutory changes for statutory changes, not for funding. The president should listen to his base, not Jared Kushner. One got you elected, the other is dead set on making you a one term president.”
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/ ... on-1116056

I think the Democrats lose nothing by at least agreeing to talk about this...

And besides, with so many of the High Priests of Trump's xenophobic base vehemently against it (Especially The Most High Priestess herself, Ann Coulter) there's a very good chance he'll pussy-out and withdraw the offer any way...
ImageImageImage

ex-khobar Andy
Posts: 5419
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2015 4:16 am
Location: Louisville KY as of July 2018

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by ex-khobar Andy »

As a starting point for discussion, it makes sense. We already have a wall of sorts and for a few hundred miles: nothing wrong with maintaining it.

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Lord Jim »

Here's what the editorial board of the WaPo said about it:
By Editorial Board
January 19 at 4:49 PM

WE CAN recite many reasons Democrats should spurn President Trump’s Saturday afternoon offer to end the government shutdown. He should not be rewarded for having taken the government hostage. Any piece of a wall would reinforce his hateful, anti-immigrant rhetoric. He’s unreliable, having made and withdrawn similar offers in the past. This one isn’t good enough; “dreamers” need a path to citizenship, not merely a three-year reprieve.

Those are serious objections. But here is something serious on the other side of the equation: Real people. Real people, with real lives that depend utterly on what Congress and the president do now.

These are the dreamers, hundreds of thousands of young people who have played by the rules, studied, worked, made lives in this country. They are American in every way but in the eyes of the law, having been brought here as children — as first-graders, on average. Thanks to a dispensation from President Barack Obama, many of them have come out of the legal shadows and are contributing to this country. If no deal is reached, the Supreme Court is likely at some point to end that dispensation, as Mr. Trump has demanded, and they will be sent back into the shadows, or to countries of which they have no memory.

These are, as well, the hundreds of thousands of Haitians and Central Americans who were allowed to stay here after natural disasters in their countries. They, too, have made lives here, legally, in many cases having children who are U.S. citizens. Mr. Trump has ordered an end to their “temporary protected status.” After all these years, that would be cruel. It would also be foolish, as these U.S. residents help support, with remittances, countries that would only send more illegal immigration to the United States if their economies took another blow.

This is a merciful nation, committed to the idea of a statute of limitations: For all but the most serious crimes, prosecutors will not go after you if enough time has passed. Why, then, would we consider a patriotic, hard-working 25-year-old an unforgivable criminal for having been brought across the border by her parents when she was 5?

Mr. Trump’s offer should be welcomed but not accepted as the final word. There should be room to talk about the amount of money; how border security will be defined and enhanced; which categories of dreamers and TPS beneficiaries are covered; what their legal status will be, and for how long. But to refuse even to talk until the government reopens does no favors to sidelined federal workers and contractors.

Unquestionably a deal would contain galling elements for both sides; that’s the nature of compromise. But a measure of statesmanship for a member of Congress now is the ability to accept some disappointments, and shrug off the inevitable attacks from purists, if it means rescuing the lives of thousands of deserving people living among us.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... d043eddc92
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Bicycle Bill
Posts: 9015
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:10 pm
Location: Surrounded by Trumptards in Rockland, WI – a small rural village in La Crosse County

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Bicycle Bill »

Unquestionably a deal would contain galling elements for both sides; that’s the nature of compromise. But a measure of statesmanship for a member of Congress now is the ability to accept some disappointments, and shrug off the inevitable attacks from purists, if it means rescuing the lives of thousands of deserving people living among us.
Those last couple of sentences say a lot.  Congress-critters need to remember that they were elected to represent the people — ALL the people — in their districts or states, not just the ones that voted for them or sent (and continues to send) them campaign contributions.  I think that the most important thing someone can take to public office is an open mind, a capability to look at an issue from multiple angles, and a willingness to let themselves be persuaded to another point of view (which, despite how some people would spin it, is not the same as being wishy-washy).

And this is not the military. It is not insubordination; it is not treason; it is a virtue to stand against what the so-called 'leaders' of your party may dictate if it is not in the best interests of the country as a whole.
Image
-"BB"-
Yes, I suppose I could agree with you ... but then we'd both be wrong, wouldn't we?

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 16540
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Scooter »

Image

I guess the San Antonio wall was built around the time of the Bowling Green massacre.
"If you don't have a seat at the table, you're on the menu."

-- Author unknown

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 9555
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Econoline »

Image
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 9555
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Econoline »

At this point I blame Mitch McConnell as much as — actually, probably MORE than — Donald Trump. Trump is just posturing, tweeting, and bullshitting (as usual); he just can't help himself. McConnell has the power to call a vote, and refuses to use it.
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

Post Reply