AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: Funding The Wall
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
JoohnWho Sorry but when Trump repeatedly says that the US needs a wall to stop drug smugglers, murderers and people with problems[sic], IMO, this is spreading fake news.

When they report 100 000 job loss all over again, it's, as I said, because people like to listen bad news: a plane crashes in the Philipines and it's on all the radio stations and tv all over the world. You in the US and me in Europe, we listen the same news at the same moment. And it's 90% a disaster or something negative.

Showing migrant caravans, heading north toward the US border just obeys to the same pattern.
The fact is it's much easier to stop a caravan than small groups of 3 or 4 sneaking in. These migranos are forming caravan because it's safer for them to travel in groups across Mexico and Guatemala.
Once at the border, they attempt to cross one by one.

WmL Trump said many things. But the main thing he said is that he wanted to build a concrete wall and have Mexico pay for it.

All the other things which is not his MAGA Wall, but which he talked about too a few times, are things which would be done anyway.

Of course you have a pro-migrant lobby in the US which is against the border, as we have it in Europe. But I don't think all democrats are for opening the borders totally. This is not true for what I read.
And I don't think that anybody would object fixing a fence where illegals could cross freely.

Even under Obama there were improvements on the border fence. Always been.
Trump talked just about what would be going on under any administration but presents that as his great policy and exceptional action. He's a comedian.
Fredledingue - your love of the biased media and what sometimes is fake news makes it difficult to discuss things with you rationally.  Yes, we both may see/read the news at essentially the same time, but I realize that what is being reported and what is actually happening are not the same thing.  You, on the other hand, accept the bias because it is confirmation of what you have chosen to believe.  

If it was only you, I (and we who see the bias) wouldn't care.  However, it is a large group of people who will not accept that they've been lied to.  

Whatever happened to the news media giving the news and the opinion/editorial section being recognizably separate?  Sadly, way too many folks do not realize that they are being fed op/ed stuff being presented as today's "news".
No, I don't believe everything from the media. For example I don't believe that a wall would stop drug smugglers and criminals.
(02-09-2019, 07:47 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: [ -> ]No, I don't believe everything from the media. For example I don't believe that a wall would stop drug smugglers and criminals.

That seems to prove that you havr accepted disinformation as if it was real. No one has ever said that walls will stop all illegals nor all druigs. However, everyone has said it would be a huge part of the total fix for these problems. This includes all the professionals who know what they are talking about. You seem to not only accept disinformation from know-nothings - but actually prioritize their drivel over input from those you should accept and believe first.
I wonder just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Stirthepot
(02-09-2019, 08:08 PM)John L Wrote: [ -> ]I wonder just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?  Stirthepot

Could somewhat depend on what music was playing.

Hiney
New wall component is being installed.

These scarecrows, ten per mile of the border, will keep the invaders away.


[Image: DzArT7sXcAAjM5h.jpg:large]
Quote:[Image: 1297773562984_ORIGINAL.jpg%3Fsize=650x&w=840&h=630]

Appeals court sides with Trump in border wall prototype dispute  

A California-based federal appeals court on Monday sided with the Trump administration in lawsuits brought by states and environmental groups challenging the U.S. government’s authority to expedite construction of barriers along the border with Mexico.


Not a good day for the Democrats, first they lost on the census citizenship question, now this.
Here is yet one more reason why the wall will get funded, and the political ramifications of the entire thing can only help Trump.  The citizenry is helping him, by going out of their way to use moral equivalents that make the Jackasses look like petty and untrustworthy.  This appeared on Business Insider, and its about to go viral.

A like article appeared on Yahoo News, but it initially gave the impression that there were every bit as many offended as praising it.  

Rep. Steve King is already jumping in and using the slogan for what it's well worth using.

[Image: 60923295a337a31197c8d89121ad92e0]

And guess what?  Even Youtube is showing contributers starting to report on this small event, begun by a grocery store.  This is actually what got me going on this and doing some searches for news articles.  

4 Days/Beginning of the End for Demoncrats


Naturally, there's a moral to all this.  Use the right common sense, moral lesson, and it quickly gains momentum for one side.  The other side will be left in the dust, as they promote a failed system, that has lessons from all over the world.

And there's one other thing here. Trump doesn't have to spend one penny on this, but will rake in all the positive result. I suspect there will be more examples of this arriving in the near future. S22
Trump’s fellow Republicans Wrote:declaring a national emergency could set a dangerous precedent, opening the door for a future Democratic president to circumvent Congress and declare emergencies on perhaps climate change or healthcare insurance.
S11
link
They'r right: Even Obama didn't declare emergency or martial law for the fight against climate warming.

Interresting the fellow republicans already predict that the next POTUS will be a democrat.
(02-14-2019, 07:46 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: [ -> ]...They're right: Even Obama didn't declare emergency or martial law for the fight against climate warming.

Shouldn't be a factor. The Left has no problem with waiting for a precedent before doing the outrageous. Harry Reid didn't care when he changed rules to get Obama's bills through. Obama didn't care when appointing Czars to conduct business. Whatever the GOP holds off doing so as not to set a precedent for Dems will still be fair game.
I agree. The left often wait for the outrageous to be done to create a precedent. S5

IMO the Fellow Republicans start to be worried about Trump's ability to conduct business in the WH...
Taking him in the party knowing that he will give them a republican presidency is one thing. Dealing with him actually leading the administration is another thing...
(02-19-2019, 04:21 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: [ -> ]Dealing with him actually leading the administration is another thing...

The reason for all this is due to one thing. He is not a member of the Deep State, and thus not one of "Them". That's why he is the Real Enemy. Spiteful
JL Wrote:he reason for all this is due to one thing. He is not a member of the Deep State, and thus not one of "Them".

Yes but also, because he is truely an idiot.

Trump's Wall funding bill for 2020 jumps to $8.6B!

Pushing up the price...
(03-10-2019, 05:23 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: [ -> ]
JL Wrote:he reason for all this is due to one thing. He is not a member of the Deep State, and thus not one of "Them".

Yes but also, because he is truely an idiot.

Trump's Wall funding bill for 2020 jumps to $8.6B!

Pushing up the price...

Fred, can you name any other billionaires who are also "truely an idiot"? Or is this just conjecture on your part? Spiteful
John, I don't know other billionaires. Trump is not an idiot because he is a billionaire. And I don't want to say that Obama was a genius neither.
There are things I like with Trump but many other things I dislike or find completely stupid with him.

IMO many of his colleagues grow grey hairs because of his non standard way of doing politics, another word for stubborn idiocy.

I think it was on one of your video where a republican said:
Quote:I voted for the wall funding. But I can't agree with the president bypassing the decision of the Congress.
I forgot who it was, but next time, vote for this guy.

And now, Trump is like "You didn't want to give me $5.7B, now I will ask you $8.6B". And you still maintain he is not an idiot?

Finally, the good thing is that they diverted money from the military to the border security. This is much more clever and logical (after all, isn't it the goal of the military to protect the country from invasions), but not what he wanted to do.

And this is how it had to be done from the beginning: Taking money form one department to another where you think it's more useful, instead of just constantly increasing the total federal budget. Instead of increasing the deficit, the debt and finally the burden on US citizens.
(03-12-2019, 08:01 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: [ -> ]...IMO many of his colleagues grow grey hairs because of his non standard way of doing politics, another word for stubborn idiocy.

Load of crap. His non-standard way of doing things is just your euphemism for common sense - and at a level unheard of in Washington.

First, forget about the bluster the elitist GOP use to predict how Trump doing anything different will just set precedents for future Democrat presidents. They could care less if a GOP has to do something first, before they would ever dream of doing the same thing. Unlike the GOP, they are not held back by scruples. Reid didn't need a precedent to change the Senate need of more than a simple majority to push through ObamaCare..
"common sens" ===> LOL
Oh-Hoooo!!  Can you believe this?!  The NYTimes editorial board is calling for congress, i.e. Jackasses, to agree funding the wall.   Shock   Can you believe that?  

Looks like its actually going to be done now. S22

Quote:NYT Editorial Board: ‘Trump Is Right’ About Border Crisis, Congress Should Approve Funds

The New York Times editorial board urged Congress to give the Donald Trump administration requested emergency funds, writing that the president was right about a crisis on the border.

“Congress, Give Trump His Border Money,” read the headline on the Sunday editorial, which argued that Democrats should approve the $4.5 billion in funds that were requested in a letter from Acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget Russell Vought.

“We are continuing to experience a humanitarian and security crisis at the southern border of the United States,” Vought wrote. “Apprehensions are expected to surpass one million by the end of the year, more than doubling those compared to last year. The number of large-scale groups of family units and unaccompanied alien children (UAC), primarily from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, seeking to enter the country and claim asylum has increased dramatically.”

“President Trump is right: There is a crisis at the southern border. Just not the one he rants about,” the editors wrote. They argue that while Trump is wrong to demand a wall and to present the border as a natural security issue, there is a very real humanitarian crisis at the border due to the surge in asylum claims and wall funding is not included in the request.
Hmm... that NYT article couldn't be related to the idea of sending illegal immigrants to Sanctuary Cities, could it?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5