 |
No one's against border security. It's the blankety-blank wall that people are against.Quote:
Border security was the primary issue that took Trump to the Presidency . The only REAL reason that Pelosi and Schumer oppose it is because Trump is President . They both supported border barriers in 2006 ;as did the emperor and Evita .
That's a ridiculous, senseless statement. It's the usual drivel we get from liberals who, when they have no real argument to make, resort to name calling. "You don't agree with me, so you must be a racist, fear-mongering Nazi!"Quote:
fueled by fear of losing power and domination for the minorities you have oppressed, exploited, and controlled since this nation was born.
It's not an issue of what you are not against, but rather of what positive actions you suggest we should take to secure our southern border. A repeat of the failed policies of the past decades just does not get my attention. Build the wall!Quote:
No one's against border security. It's the blankety-blank wall that people are against.
tal you expose yourself by saying you want inertia rather than getting a negotiated solution with Trump. I think you and WG are both in serious denial because you have provided no solution to open borders . Why not admit that is what you want ? You can go full George Soros .
Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Then what did you mean when you posted that "America is a Jewish lackey".
That line comes right out of the anti-semite talking points.
To repeat: "Immigration enforcement" does not need a wall. It needs sane laws, well-trained employees, respect for people from other races and cultures.Quote:
think you and WG are both in serious denial because you have provided no solution to open borders .
That ship has sailed and my opposition to a fence was voted down years ago. As will your big beautiful concrete wall from sea to shining sea that you can see from space. It's a false narrative just like your open borders fallacy, and that inertia comment. The dufus has made the southern border a humanitarian crisis with his fearmongering rhetoric.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
We own half of the Rio Grande. Do we build the wall midstream? Or, on which side of the Rio Grande will we build it? Hmmmm, can't build it on the Mexican side. If we build it on the US side, we'll cut off our access to the river, which opens up tons of business and eminent domain and environmental problems. A wall will keep "them" out -- or keep us in?
Why wouldn't the wall have the occasional gate?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
An "occasional gate" won't do anything for the tons of business and eminent domain and environmental problems, will it?
In any case, the wall is a dead issue. Not a chance in hell it's going to be built. Especially since Trump has changed his tune from Mexico paying for it to YOU, the American taxpayer, paying for it.
The same tactic he used in business and left banks and contractors on the hook while he walked away. What's the chances he is doing it again since Mexico said screw you dufus. In addition he lies about how far along he is on his wall, and even says he will cut the ribbon later this year. Who even listens to this guy?Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
Only a sucker!
That may be so, but America has taken positions which place it firmly within Jewish policy such as moving its embassy to Jerusalem, a provocative move, and not opposing Jewish settlements. Why do you think the invasion of Iraq happened, Iraq under Saddam Hussein posed no threat to anyone but Israel. It was destroyed because it attacked Israel. America makes no complaint regarding Israeli air attacks on Syria, even though Israel is not at war against Syria. The American position against Iran benefits no one but Israel. American foreign policy is squarely in the hands of Jewish interests and the occupant of the White House has Jewish interests within his own family. Wake up and smell the rosesQuote:
Originally Posted by Athos
Look I think this two state solution is rubbish, better to give the Palestinians citizenship and completely annex the West Bank. Expel anyone who doesn't take up the offer and within a generation you would have a solution everyone could live with
Actually, yes. The gates would solve a lot of problems. They seem to work in a lot of places and for many purposes.Quote:
An "occasional gate" won't do anything for the tons of business and eminent domain and environmental problems, will it?
Obviously you need gates, why not cede the river to Mexico and build your wall a little back on solid ground. Do you think you will loose anything by doing this since that is what you are doing anyway. You could build great bridges as border crossings and regulate the flow as you do now, it is an effective barrier to a few transident refugees. Ask yourself what could a few billion dollars do in central America to stem the flow? The money could be spent on establishing industries to keep the people there, far more effective than a wall
By international treaty ,and flood zone requirements, the wall would have a set back from the Rio Grande .
Nonsense. How much more do we need to send? They have received billions already. Most of what gets sent will just end up in some government officials retirement plan. Come to think of it, that's much like what happens here!Quote:
Ask yourself what could a few billion dollars do in central America to stem the flow? The money could be spent on establishing industries to keep the people there, far more effective than a wall.
Build the wall.
I think you need to ask, do you really send anything? Much of your aid is tied aid, if it happens at all, remember Haiti. The aid you send is spent in the US not in the country and so aids only the US. Sure, build the wall the US needs the aid and the employment, what is one more useless structure anyway, better than highways to nowhere or bridges to nowhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Thank you Tom, my point exactly, you cannot build this border on the border for much of its length and having a design that doesn't restrict flood flow makes sense, last thing you want is to be accused of flooding MexicoQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
You guys just don't get it, do you? The government will have to acquire several thousand miles to have the land to build the wall. Uncle Sam will have to go to court to establish eminent domain, then pay through the nose for all the private property, the waterfront businesses and homes, and everything else now existing on the property needed. By the time the preliminaries are done, Trump will be long gone and no one will care.
True but a few more miles might make a difference, of course they could just declare the border zone a national park, eminent domain, you know works in more ways than one or it could all become a military firing range, great excuse to practice life fire exercises, see if the illegals will cross then, never knowing when the next attack will come. Jets racing up and down the border making sonic booms should discourage them, but then you guys aren't that innovativeQuote:
Originally Posted by Athos
Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
If idiot boy declares it a firing range or that other stuff, he'll be run out of town on the rail of impeachment. Hey, now that I think of it - good idea!!
Athos I already established the fact that there are moves the government would have to make to extend the border fencing already built (hmmm how did the government manage to get over all the obstacles to build about 600 miles already ? ) There are natural barriers that do not need a physical barrier because they are barriers themselves .
The $5 billion Trump is asking for is spit in the ocean that amounts to a rounding error in the budget .NY spent almost $4 billion to build one bridge across the Hudson River . Massachusetts spent $24 billion to dig a tunnel .The Federal Government spent $25 billion annually maintaining vacant buildings and property . Billions more are wasted in the Federal Budget for various reasons that could easily be redirected . I am shocked the Dems have chosen this ant-hill to take a stand on;especially when what they could get in the negotiations would make this a victory for them.
Yes Tom and not the mention the billions that just disappeared in various wars, he could use the defence budget or even CIA black money already approved but no he is doing it the right wayQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Open the government back up and we talk! It's that simple. We will see how this plays out. Amazing how the repubs with full control of the congress couldn't get it done. Now you want the dems to do what feckless repubs could not. Or you would rather not pay the border patrol or coast guard while talks continue.
Personally I would give this administration a damn dime until he accounts for the loot he has already gotten.
Now that's really good. "Cave in and give us what we want, and then we can talk about what you want." Good luck with that.Quote:
Open the government back up and we talk! It's that simple.
Agree completely. It's a disgrace that the republicans have so little courage.Quote:
Amazing how the repubs with full control of the congress couldn't get it done.
Repubs don't want a wall either. Certainly not Texans
https://www.star-telegram.com/news/s...152402734.html
https://www.texasmonthly.com/the-dai...d-trumps-wall/
http://lonestarliberty.net/alert-joh...er-wall-video/
And
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/07...n-you-cant-do/
Perry has long been a critic of building a wall or fence along the border. In 2011, during his first failed run for president, he called for "strategic fencing" along parts of the border.“If you build a 30-foot wall from El Paso to Brownsville, the 35-foot ladder business gets real good," Perry said at the time at a campaign stop in New Hampshire.
Sorry ;those agencies are essential . How about instead of that we lay off some non-essential government employees instead of giving them deferred pay ? The Dems seem to forget that the government serves us and not the other way around.Quote:
Or you would rather not pay the border patrol or coast guard while talks continue.
This is not a state issue .Quote:
Repubs don't want a wall either. Certainly not Texans
I addressed El Paso comment #13Quote:
Perry has long been a critic of building a wall or fence along the border. In 2011, during his first failed run for president, he called for "strategic fencing" along parts of the border.“If you build a 30-foot wall from El Paso to Brownsville, the 35-foot ladder business gets real good,"
Quote:
In El Paso ,a metal fence put up in Bush years has dramatically curtailed illegal crossings by 89% from Juarez .El Paso went from one of the most dangerous cities in America to one of the safest
So walls work and government employees don't, do you see the irony in this
deleted
Now that's a good one!Quote:
So walls work and government employees don't, do you see the irony in this.
Well the new house has passed bills to fund government with no wall money, and feckless Mitch says he will not vote on a bill the president doesn't approve of, even though they are the same bills the senate passed last month. Two repub senators have already come out to support the house bills. More to follow?
So what does it all mean, high stakes poker or slight of hand
It's a game of chicken.
https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/cac...95/1689527.jpg
Yes, but you see Trump is unaffected, he has played such games for a long time, whereas he is hurting madam's power base, what do politicians do when there are no public servants
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Like Donald Trump? He's about as non-essential as you can get.
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/custom...quote_icon.png Originally Posted by tomder55 https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/custom...post-right.png
How about instead of that we lay off some non-essential government employees
All we can do is make our recommendation November 2020 . It's funny that they furloughed non-essential Federal workers and it applies to most of the Federal work forceQuote:
Like Donald Trump? He's about as non-essential as you can get.
That includes the garbage collectors and cleaning the essential workers bathroom. Essential and non essential workers are as subjective as it gets, and a job not done affects the whole in some striking ways. As this drags out we will see that, as those non essentials have bills to pay.
You should not in my opinion expect government to act a business or corporation.
Look ;DC makes a fortune off tourist visiting the Capitol . Same with the gateway cities into the national parks . For the time of the shut down they should do the maintenance Or shut the parks down and lose the tourist business. It is as simple as that . What you are witnessing is the tragedy of the commons . When everyone owns it ,no one does . All you guys can think of for solutions is make the taxpayer who may never use the parks pay for it with their taxes .
Tal you are a communist at heart, all workers are essential, some are just more useful than others. So a few drones don't get their toilets cleaned, it is a tradegy. You should expect government workers to actQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Clete, in America honest work for honest pay is the NORM, and expected. TSA, Border Patrol, and the Coast Guard not being paid on time is ludicrous, and even more insane that they will be expected to work for free until congress steps up and over rides the lunacy of this lying cheating dufus.
Or is the dufus afraid of his loony right wing? They love hostage stand offs.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:14 AM. |