RadioFreeLiberal.com

Smart Voices, Be Heard
It is currently Wed Apr 24, 2019 5:55 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 115 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jan 12, 2019 3:47 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 12:34 pm
Posts: 6078
"Howdy" is Amy Patrick. :mrgreen: I found her and her credentials. (The original DU post didn't identify them, precisely.)

A forensic engineer explains why Trump would be dead before the border wall was completed
https://qz.com/1521310/a-forensic-engin ... e-of-time/

The latest to weigh in is Amy Patrick, a Houston-based structural engineer whose assessment on the wisdom of erecting the barrier proposed by Donald Trump has gone viral since she posted it on Facebook on Jan. 8.

It lays out in detail why, in her view, the wall is “a monumental waste of time.” It’s been shared more than 65,000 times.

[snip]

Trump has staked significant political capital on getting the wall built, but in her Facebook post, Patrick estimates the project wouldn’t be finished during his lifetime. (She wasn’t immediately available to comment for this story.)

The engineer, who works at building consulting firm Apollo BBC and teaches at University of Houston, notes the project would run up against a variety of problems, including landowner challenges, potential ecological damage, and higher flash-flooding risks.

Initial estimates by nonpartisan consultants put the wall’s cost at $15 billion. Based on Patrick’s experience—her job involves sorting out structural issues in engineering projects—she believes the final bill would end up being closer to $50 billion.

That’s because constant maintenance requirements and unexpected glitches would obliterate original cost estimates. The US Government Accountability Office agrees that the project is off-track and would end up grossly over budget.

[snip]

Patrick’s overall appraisal is unequivocal: “Structurally and civil-engineering wise, the wall is not a feasible project.”

[snip][end]

Again, this is aside from its political and moral realities, and its environmental and indigenous impacts.


So we have choice between believing a Structural Engineer or a raving Narcissist.

Easy choice

_________________
" I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." - Mahatma Gandhi (1869 - 1948)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 12, 2019 5:02 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 10:41 pm
Posts: 2974
Location: Oregon
Fake but funny. :rw)


Attachments:
Deport.jpg
Deport.jpg [ 142.7 KiB | Viewed 519 times ]

_________________
"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it." –Mark Twain
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 12, 2019 5:16 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 12:34 pm
Posts: 6078
Since does Orange Shit Gibbon get to decide who does and/or does not get "Deported"?

_________________
" I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." - Mahatma Gandhi (1869 - 1948)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2019 9:14 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 13958
Location: Sunny South Florida
I've always said Trump reminds me of Patrick Buchanan in many ways. He's using Buchanan's campaign slogan, and for a while Trump was part of the Perot-founded Reform Party that Buchanan was also involved in.

Here's a tweet from Twitler last night. It's his usual mess of non sequitur.

Donald J. Trump
‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump
....Border is eventually going to be militarized and defended or the United States, as we have known it, is going to cease to exist...And Americans will not go gentle into that good night. Patrick Buchanan. The great people of our Country demand proper Border Security NOW!
7:18 PM - 13 Jan 2019

From Wikiquote:
Angry white male” is now an acceptable slur in culture and politics. So it is that people of that derided ethnicity, race, and gender see in Donald Trump someone who unapologetically berates and mocks the elites who have dispossessed them, and who despise them. Is it any surprise that militant anti-government groups attract white males? Is it so surprising that the Donald today, like Jess Willard a century ago, is seen by millions as “The Great White Hope”?
"The Great White Hope" (May 26, 2016), Patrick J. Buchanan

Middle America believes the establishment is not looking out for the nation but for retention of its power. And in attacking Trump it is not upholding some objective moral standard but seeking to destroy a leader who represents a grave threat to that power. Trump’s followers see an American Spring as crucial, and they are not going to let past boorish behavior cause them to abandon the last best chance to preserve the country they grew up in.
What Hath Trump Wrought?" (November 8, 2016), Townhall

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2019 12:41 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:53 am
Posts: 15899
FBI now says what Libertas said 3 years ago.

Do I get credit now?

_________________
"Corporate Democrat" phrase created at the same place "Angry Mob" was...People keep falling for rightwing talking points. How sad.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2019 12:48 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am
Posts: 12276
FBI now says what Libertas said 3 years ago.

Do I get credit now?


Here you go:

www.youtube.com Video from : www.youtube.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:48 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 13958
Location: Sunny South Florida
So, again, just so we separate truth and lies. Trump keeps saying "the Democrats were for the wall before I got elected".

Politifact rates that as Mostly False.

Did Democrats reverse border wall position after Donald Trump was elected?
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-mete ... -position/

Just over half of Democrats in the Senate voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which was signed into law by President George W. Bush, including then-Sens. Barack Obama, Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton. Most Democrats in the House voted against it, including Rep. Nancy Pelosi.

The law authorized a fence along about 700 miles of the border between the U.S.-Mexico border. By 2015, U.S. Customs and Border Protection had constructed 654 miles of fencing, the Government Accountability Office reported.

The fence was different from the wall Trump promised to build on the campaign trail, which he said would be made of "hardened concrete" as tall as "95 stories" with a "very big, very beautiful door."

Trump derided the 2006 fence as too modest during the 2016 campaign — he said it was "not a wall" but a "little fence" that could be scaled with a ladder.

"Now we got lucky because it was such a little wall, it was such a nothing wall, no, they couldn't get their environmental — probably a snake was in the way or a toad," Trump said. (Actually, the project didn’t face environmental hurdles; we rated that part of the claim Mostly False.)

A 2016 Associated Press report from the border described the fencing as "rust-colored thick bars" that form "teeth-like slats." That includes the steel fence dividing Nogales in Arizona and Mexico, which is between 18 and 26 feet tall. "There are miles of gaps between segments and openings in the fence itself," the AP reported.

The Democrats’ offer to Trump is a continuing resolution on last year’s appropriations act, which provided $1.3 billion for fencing and additional money for other types of border security. The language made it so that the funds could only be used on repairing or extending fencing that had already been built under the 2006 law.

We’re rated similar statements in which the Trump administration has claimed Democrats wanted a wall as Half True, but here, Trump goes farther. Democrats have not changed their stance on the border fencing they previously supported; they simply don’t support the more ambitious wall Trump proposes.

Trump said Schumer has "has repeatedly supported a physical barrier in the past along with many other Democrats. They changed their mind only after I was elected president."

Schumer, along with tens of other Democrats including former President Barack Obama, voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which authorized building a fence along about 700 miles of the border between the United States and Mexico. That’s the majority of the barrier in place today along the southern border.

However, the fence was mocked as a "nothing wall" by Trump in the past and was far less ambitious, both politically and physically, than the wall Trump wants to build now.

[snip][end]

So let's be clear. He used to mock this fence, said it was inadequate. (He's not wrong that it can be scaled. See earlier photos I posted.) Instead, he wanted to build his massive, higher concrete wall.

But he himself now says he wants not that concrete wall, but a steel-slatted barrier. Well, that is called a fence, and is what we have now, and is what Democrats voted to enhance.

In essence, Donald Trump seems mostly to be arguing with himself. I don't know if we can call that mental illness, but it's a bit like struggling with jello.

"I want a wall! OK not a wall! A fence! But not the fence the Democrats want! A more wall-y fence!" :roll:

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:32 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am
Posts: 12276
I think the time is ripe to start calling what Trump wants an "iron curtain."

I don't want to build Trump an iron curtain.

I also don't want to crochet him a lace doiley.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 1:02 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm
Posts: 19864
I think the time is ripe to start calling what Trump wants an "iron curtain."

I don't want to build Trump an iron curtain.

I also don't want to crochet him a lace doiley.


I think you're right about all of the above.

_________________


Stop calling the cops on us.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:06 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:10 pm
Posts: 18699
Location: The blue parts of the map
That's it of course. The spiky fence is already being built in places. Obama quietly authorized it, and it was quietly budgeted, and most people agreed it was a decent enough border fence compared to the earlier chain link joke. There was no big flap, since no wannabe demagogue got up at rallies and called it the only way we can stop millions of gangsters, terrorists, robbers, rapists and other such not nice people who "just happen" to be of color. For me, it always looked like any decent chop saw could get through it, and besides they find a new tunnel under it on a regular basis. Fortunately, since said millions of gangsters, terrorists, robbers, rapists and other such people who "just happen" to be of color are a complete figment of racist polemic excess, it did indeed keep them out. A line of toilet paper would have kept them out too, since they don't exist, but that seems to be irrelevant to the current discussion.

Here's the thing with a fence. The wind goes through it. If drumpf really said he'd give us a 95-story wall, it's one more proof that his brain is stuck in the fourth grade. There are few engineering impossibilities, but that's one of them. I can't think of any way to deal with the wind load on such a thing, unless it was essentially a taller version of the Pyramids that also had to be 1700 miles long. And the pyramids didn't keep robbers out either. The tombs were opened and looted very early on.

_________________
"This is the end of my presidency. I'm fucked." --President Donald J. Trump, May 2017


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:13 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am
Posts: 12276
You'd be surprised just how much wind does not get through a fence. It seems like every static and dynamic situation calls upon a fence to withstand it.

It's like nothing happens it doesn't tug at a fence. They'd be the most sought after victim for natural forces to attack if it wasn't for walls, walls have a harder time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 11:56 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2011 3:45 am
Posts: 9209
Democrats Propose to Add $1 Billion in Border Spending

“House Democrats have added more than $1 billion in border-related spending to a package of funding bills that would reopen most of the government, even as President Trump said he would have a ‘major announcement’ on Saturday about the border and the shutdown stalemate,” the New York Times reports.

“Both sides’ actions were the first indications of possible movement over the shutdown after a week of inertia and harsh words between Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Mr. Trump.”

https://politicalwire.com/2019/01/19/de ... -spending/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 12:20 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2011 3:45 am
Posts: 9209
Exclusive: Trump plans shutdown compromise

President Trump plans to use remarks from the Diplomatic Reception Room on Saturday afternoon to propose a notable immigration compromise, according to sources familiar with the speech.

The offer is expected to include Trump’s $5.7 billion demand for wall money in exchange for the BRIDGE Act — which would extend protections for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) — and also legislation to extend the legal status of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) holders, according to a source with direct knowledge.

https://www.axios.com/trump-expected-im ... cd534.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 12:26 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:48 pm
Posts: 18087
Exclusive: Trump plans shutdown compromise

President Trump plans to use remarks from the Diplomatic Reception Room on Saturday afternoon to propose a notable immigration compromise, according to sources familiar with the speech.

The offer is expected to include Trump’s $5.7 billion demand for wall money in exchange for the BRIDGE Act — which would extend protections for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) — and also legislation to extend the legal status of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) holders, according to a source with direct knowledge.

https://www.axios.com/trump-expected-im ... cd534.html


As long as it is written in stone and mot something Trump can back out on the DEMS should jump at the offer.

Because the buliding of the wall is going to be tied up in court until Trump is no longer in office. Then the next President who is presumably going to be a dem can cancel it

_________________
"my choice is for people like you to be deported -Ike Bana 5/13/18

"within weeks of being rid of the likes of you, rid of every fucking one of you,we would begin to see what kind of country this ought to be" Ike Bana 6/14/18


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:14 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:10 pm
Posts: 18699
Location: The blue parts of the map
I should have said ALL the wind doesn't go through it. Those big-ass spikes that were authorized under Obama without any flap at all still have a wind load, but it's way less than a wall, which wind only goes around.

Obama's spikes only show how politicized the border became. There wasn't the slightest whimper about those, but then the border became a symbol of something deeper. It's this year's version of what used to be the terrorist threat, and before that the Red threat, and before that WWII.

At no time has the country ever confronted the wisdom stated in a mere comic strip, when Pogo or whoever said we have met the enemy and it is us.

_________________
"This is the end of my presidency. I'm fucked." --President Donald J. Trump, May 2017


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:06 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk

Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 12:39 am
Posts: 2138
I personally would tell Trump if he wants his wall, what he needs to include is he will nominate Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court it Ginsberg has to leave. That would go a long way towards cooling down the rhetoric in this country.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:52 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 13958
Location: Sunny South Florida
I'd like that, but the probability of that being part of any deal is about the same as Ike's chances for coronation to be Earth Emperor. :D

Anyway, deal was proposed, was rejected.

Trump’s bid to negotiate on wall met by Democratic rejection
The president’s remarks marked an attempt to end the 29-day shutdown, though Democratic lawmakers swiftly dismissed the approach.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/ ... al-1116049

President Donald Trump on Saturday proposed an immigration deal to end the government shutdown, though Democratic leaders quickly declared his overture dead on arrival.

[snip]

But the approach had already been rejected by Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats who said it largely repackaged a proposal that had failed earlier. Pelosi called the idea a "non-starter," and Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) also panned the proposal as a way to reopen the government, even though Trump's plan cribbed from Durbin's own legislation.

[snip]

And Trump's endorsement for immigration protections — a three-year extension of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals recipients and an extension of Temporary Protected Status for the refugees who hold it — drew immediate criticism from conservatives.

Ann Coulter, who urged Trump to wage the shutdown fight over the border wall, said "Trump proposes amnesty. We voted for Trump and got Jeb!"

“The offer the president announced today is a loser for the forgotten American workers who were central to his campaign promises,” said Roy Beck, who leads NumbersUSA, which advocates for more restrictive immigration policies. “An amnesty-for-wall trade would once again reward previous immigration lawbreakers without preventing future immigration lawbreakers.“

[snip]

Yet Democratic aides said they were not consulted on the matter ahead of time and deemed the offer as not serious. At a minimum the party wants permanent protections for immigrants at risk of deportation.

And even if the Republican Senate tries to take up the proposal, it's not going anywhere in the House, Pelosi said.

“Democrats were hopeful that the President was finally willing to re-open government and proceed with a much-need discussion to protect the border," Pelosi said shortly before the speech. "Unfortunately, initial reports make clear that his proposal is a compilation of several previously rejected initiatives, each of which is unacceptable and in total, do not represent a good faith effort to restore certainty to people’s lives.“

Most Senate Democrats supported $25 billion in border security in exchange for a path to citizenship for hundreds of thousands of immigrants last year. But Trump lobbied against it, and the party hasn't moved an inch during the month-long shutdown and myriad offers from the White House.

[snip]

He claimed his strength had grown in the polls as the shutdown had proceeded, though he declined to offer any specific numbers. Independent polling shows the opposite, and the president’s campaign team has increasingly fretted that the shutdown is kicking off his reelection effort on a sour note.

Trump also insisted he would not sign a continuing resolution to temporarily reopen the government, telling the lawmakers it would be too hard to shut down the government again after reopening it if he didn't get the money for his wall, and that “Nancy said she’d only give me a dollar.”

“If I open it up, it's going to be hard to shut down again.” :roll:

[snip][end]

What a fecking idiot. It should be hard to shut down. That's the way it's supposed to work.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 7:06 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 13958
Location: Sunny South Florida
I should have said ALL the wind doesn't go through it. Those big-ass spikes that were authorized under Obama without any flap at all still have a wind load, but it's way less than a wall, which wind only goes around.

Obama's spikes only show how politicized the border became. There wasn't the slightest whimper about those, but then the border became a symbol of something deeper. It's this year's version of what used to be the terrorist threat, and before that the Red threat, and before that WWII.


Sorry to quibble, but I will.

Obama DID vote for the Secure Fence Act of 2006, when he was in Congress and Shrub was POTUS. Many Democrats voted against it, but he was one who did.

This is what he said: (quote from the Pacific Standard)
"The bill before us will certainly do some good. It will authorize some badly needed funding for better fences and better security along our borders, and that should help stem some of the tide of illegal immigration in this country," then-Senator Obama said, speaking on the bill during a floor speech in September of 2006. "But if we think that putting up a few more miles of fence is by any means the whole answer to our immigration problems, then I believe we are seriously kidding ourselves." Despite this criticism, Obama went on to support the bill, along with 25 other Democrats in the Senate and 138 Democrats in the House. Some analysts saw Democrats' support for the fence as a begrudging political calculation; Republicans at the time were pushing a bill that would charge illegal immigrants as felons, and some Democrats might have seen the secure fence bill as the lesser of two evils.

He may have done some maintenance of fencing, but there was no initiative to really add on considerably to what was being built starting in 2007.

This is what is there at the border. About 350 miles of it. NO SPIKES on top.

Image

The red areas are actual fencing. The light blue vehicle barriers. I would not call it a "wall," but then it seems to me we already have the "steel slatted structures" Trump wants, and they are called ... fencing. Not a wall.

Where do we still not have either? Most of SW Texas. There's a reason: Texans don't want it :mrgreen: , the geography there is really problematic, and other stuff.

Here's what it looks like? Is it scalable? Yes, yes it is. They knew that in 2006, and we know it now.

Image

OK, the baby's head here is an art installation. The rest is real and was already there. :D

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 7:53 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:48 pm
Posts: 18087
I personally would tell Trump if he wants his wall, what he needs to include is he will nominate Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court it Ginsberg has to leave. That would go a long way towards cooling down the rhetoric in this country.



You are assuming Garland would pass the Senate. I personally believe Ginsberg is in worse shape then they are letting on.

_________________
"my choice is for people like you to be deported -Ike Bana 5/13/18

"within weeks of being rid of the likes of you, rid of every fucking one of you,we would begin to see what kind of country this ought to be" Ike Bana 6/14/18


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:23 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am
Posts: 12276
It's COD. Trump can't be trusted in making a deal which involves him doing or agreeing to something at a later time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:41 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:10 pm
Posts: 18699
Location: The blue parts of the map
The point is that a border barrier was under construction in many places, and still is, from an appropriation made years ago. As I understand, it was never going to be continuous from the Gulf to the Pacific.

What I'm trying to say, in a medium notoriously hostile to nuance, is this: Did you hear anything about it? I didn't. It wasn't as big a deal until it got politicized in the 2016 campaign. It's the Vietnam debate all over again. The center has collapsed, everyone's either for it or against it, and no one is going to budge an inch. And the shutdown drags on, and the country comes ever closer to chaos.

_________________
"This is the end of my presidency. I'm fucked." --President Donald J. Trump, May 2017


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:53 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 13958
Location: Sunny South Florida
Nuance is important.

The liar in chief doesn't seem to have any.

He ran on a 95 foot concrete wall. He told his people Mexico would pay for it. Yes, I knew then that was absurd. It couldn't be built, and of course they wouldn't.

Now here we are.

He's still asking for a wall, even though in practical terms it sounds a lot like what was called in 2006, "a fence". He criticized what was already there as inadequate.

OK. Maybe. But now he wants to build more of it. As I've said more than once, it can be very hard to negotiate with jello, and that seems to be what we're dealing with.

He's stuck on a figure. $5.7 billion. That doesn't budge. On everything else, we can't seem to get much clarity. Like the how, where, what. What are we building? Where are we putting it? Oh and how will we get the land? How much will we end up spending? Is it more of that 350 miles of what we've already got? If so, how well is that stuff already working?

I'm not big on giving 5.7 billion for jello. Personally, I'd like some answers to those questions that make sense, first. That's just how I roll.

Looks to me like, as other people have put it, a vanity project for a vainglorious dear leader, and not much more, and to me that's not worth much.

This to me is not either/or. We can enhance border security, no I am not for "open borders," but I'm also not for "the wall" as has been previously described by the person still asking for it. There is a huge excluded middle there, but I and other Democrats are not the ones excluding it. There are plenty of better, smarter ways of enhancing border security, and have the added advantage of actually working.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Last edited by ProfessorX on Sat Jan 19, 2019 9:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:55 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:48 pm
Posts: 18087
The point is that a border barrier was under construction in many places, and still is, from an appropriation made years ago. As I understand, it was never going to be continuous from the Gulf to the Pacific.

What I'm trying to say, in a medium notoriously hostile to nuance, is this: Did you hear anything about it? I didn't. It wasn't as big a deal until it got politicized in the 2016 campaign. It's the Vietnam debate all over again. The center has collapsed, everyone's either for it or against it, and no one is going to budge an inch. And the shutdown drags on, and the country comes ever closer to chaos.



I understand in March there will be no food stamps. Families will go hungry if this pissing contest doesnt soon end. Make the deal the wall will never be built the money will never get spent. The Dems get the dreamers and children dont go to bed hungry. Who loses in that deal?

_________________
"my choice is for people like you to be deported -Ike Bana 5/13/18

"within weeks of being rid of the likes of you, rid of every fucking one of you,we would begin to see what kind of country this ought to be" Ike Bana 6/14/18


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:57 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk

Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 12:39 am
Posts: 2138


You are assuming Garland would pass the Senate. I personally believe Ginsberg is in worse shape then they are letting on.


If Donald Trump nominated Merrick Garland, he would pass the senate easily for he owns the Republican party.

THe biggest problem in any wall compromise is whether he can get the approval of Sean, Rush and Laura. If
they are not on board, there can be no compromise in writing for its no mistake Trump's proposal came out
on a Saturday.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 9:01 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 13958
Location: Sunny South Florida
It's not a pissing contest.

Fact: Democrats are willing to reopen the government unconditionally. They have been trying to do so.

Fact 2: It's the POTUS who has set a condition for its reopening. "The Wall". You know, just because a boondoggle will never be built doesn't mean it now makes sense.

Fact 3: I believe this is known as holding those affected by the shutdown hostage.

Image

Tell me what is wrong with Schumer's position? REOPEN THE GOVERNMENT FIRST.

Negotiate about the Bridge Act & Border Security outside of a hostage/shutdown environment. We.should.not.shut.down.the.govt.over.a.policy.difference.

It's totally reasonable, it's totally a solution, and needless to say I totally agree with it.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 115 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bengal59 and 22 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group