Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The shutdown has little to do with security or even campaign promisies. It’s a way for Trump to, once again, control the narrative. He gives a rats ass about anything other than keeping the story on him.
Because you would prefer democrats control the narrative: Impeach! Mueller! Russia!
I would prefer we open the government and pass laws they HELP people. What do you want?
You can’t own the libs forever.
I would prefer they keep the govt closed and pass less laws. We've had 200+ years of government and we have laws running out of our a****.
Maybe it's time to take a break from anymore unelected workers imposing more policy, law and paper on us. I don't need Washington DC to run every aspect of my life, unlike you hope for.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The shutdown has little to do with security or even campaign promisies. It’s a way for Trump to, once again, control the narrative. He gives a rats ass about anything other than keeping the story on him.
Because you would prefer democrats control the narrative: Impeach! Mueller! Russia!
I would prefer we open the government and pass laws they HELP people. What do you want?
You can’t own the libs forever.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The shutdown has little to do with security or even campaign promisies. It’s a way for Trump to, once again, control the narrative. He gives a rats ass about anything other than keeping the story on him.
Because you would prefer democrats control the narrative: Impeach! Mueller! Russia!
Anonymous wrote:The shutdown has little to do with security or even campaign promisies. It’s a way for Trump to, once again, control the narrative. He gives a rats ass about anything other than keeping the story on him.
Anonymous wrote:Keep it shutdown!
This is start of class warfare on elites.
Anonymous wrote:
Even if they flew in mandatory e-verify would prevent them from working.
I also support other measures to ensure people here illegally get caught and sent home. No one really has the stones to put in place what needs to be done to get these folks out. But at the very least we need to make sure it isnt easy to be here undocumented.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The general alt-right response to why the Canadian healthcare system won't work for the US is that it can't be "scaled up" -- that when take something which can be funded, delivered, monitored and enforced on a small scale, it doesn't necessarily translate into something which can be done on a large scale.
Sometimes small issues at the small scale become insurmountable on a larger scale. For example, the issue of eminent domain is not usually an issue for building a fence or wall on your own property -- but it sure as hell is going to rear up if you are fencing off all of the southern border of the US, and exponentially so.
Why does that make it insurmountable? Take the eminent domain cases to court along with the nature reserves and everyone else who has an issue with it. It may take years but so what? Let it play out.
It's not insurmountable, it's just one (*of many*) costs that aren't being addressed. Make a realistic assessment of the scale-up costs, acknowledge how they come into play -- and not in, say, a private home's fence -- and then run it up the GAO flagpole.
But you won't. You just point to a private home fence and act like that's some kind of reasonable analogy.
well again i'm not the one who point to a private home fence as an analogy. And again, the parallel is that fences keep people out... which is exactly what a wall would do. Sure we could discussed the total costs but that isnt was is even being requested here so not sure what your point is.
Clearly a fence couldn't keep illegals from working at Trump's golf resort so not sure what your point is.
If the first wall on the border had been there, they would not have made it to Trump's golf resort fences.
The border wall isnt the only solution. Mandatory e-verify will solve the issue of getting past golf resort fences if they get past the first wall..
Well no, because the Trump Organization knowingly hid illegal immigrants, so making it mandatory just provides another crime to charge them with. That said you really have no idea how these people made their way to the US. They could have easily flown here to visit family.
Even if they flew in mandatory e-verify would prevent them from working.
I also support other measures to ensure people here illegally get caught and sent home. No one really has the stones to put in place what needs to be done to get these folks out. But at the very least we need to make sure it isnt easy to be here undocumented.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Fun Fact: The deficit created daily in this country exceeds $5 billion.
The Democrats would be crazy to approve spending any money on the wall.
I will loose my faith in humanity if that happens
Democrats all voted for the wall in the past
Secure Fence Act, a 2006 political compromise on immigration. Signed by President Bush and supported by 90 Democratic members of Congress, it included funding for "two layers of reinforced fencing" plus "additional physical barriers" along roughly 700 miles of border from California to Texas.
Among the senators who backed it: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and current Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.
Democrats offered Trump $25 billion for the wall as recently as last year. He chose to turn them down. No more coddling the orange toddler.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The general alt-right response to why the Canadian healthcare system won't work for the US is that it can't be "scaled up" -- that when take something which can be funded, delivered, monitored and enforced on a small scale, it doesn't necessarily translate into something which can be done on a large scale.
Sometimes small issues at the small scale become insurmountable on a larger scale. For example, the issue of eminent domain is not usually an issue for building a fence or wall on your own property -- but it sure as hell is going to rear up if you are fencing off all of the southern border of the US, and exponentially so.
Why does that make it insurmountable? Take the eminent domain cases to court along with the nature reserves and everyone else who has an issue with it. It may take years but so what? Let it play out.
It's not insurmountable, it's just one (*of many*) costs that aren't being addressed. Make a realistic assessment of the scale-up costs, acknowledge how they come into play -- and not in, say, a private home's fence -- and then run it up the GAO flagpole.
But you won't. You just point to a private home fence and act like that's some kind of reasonable analogy.
well again i'm not the one who point to a private home fence as an analogy. And again, the parallel is that fences keep people out... which is exactly what a wall would do. Sure we could discussed the total costs but that isnt was is even being requested here so not sure what your point is.
Clearly a fence couldn't keep illegals from working at Trump's golf resort so not sure what your point is.
If the first wall on the border had been there, they would not have made it to Trump's golf resort fences.
The border wall isnt the only solution. Mandatory e-verify will solve the issue of getting past golf resort fences if they get past the first wall..
Well no, because the Trump Organization knowingly hid illegal immigrants, so making it mandatory just provides another crime to charge them with. That said you really have no idea how these people made their way to the US. They could have easily flown here to visit family.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Look at this map. We have a major problem
How so? The areas without fencing are extremely remote. There are no roads out there, no houses, nothing but desert. Crossing it is very difficult. Border Patrol would benefit from helicopters and drones for those areas.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Fun Fact: The deficit created daily in this country exceeds $5 billion.
The Democrats would be crazy to approve spending any money on the wall.
I will loose my faith in humanity if that happens
Democrats all voted for the wall in the past
Secure Fence Act, a 2006 political compromise on immigration. Signed by President Bush and supported by 90 Democratic members of Congress, it included funding for "two layers of reinforced fencing" plus "additional physical barriers" along roughly 700 miles of border from California to Texas.
Among the senators who backed it: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and current Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.