The Trump Shutdown

[WhitewalkerInPhilly]

Well, I have to admit that Schumer is laying it on thick, and I have little love for these two. But let's give credit where credit is due.

 

Mr. 45 has owned any impending shutdown.

 

https://thepoliticalinsider.com/trump-shutdown/

 

All I'm going to say is this: while the Republicans control both houses of Congress, and the executive branch until January 3rd...when it will control two of those three.

 

If they can't do anything until then, then yeah, the president needs to own up to his comments about how shutdowns are the president's fault.

[Buffalo_Gal]

Well, as Trump pointed out to Nancy today, 10 Democrats need to vote for wall funding in the Senate - which Chuckie will not allow (notice the lack of eye contact on Schumer's part when he speaks to Trump). The fact that the Democrats are unwilling to vote for wall funding, and cannot explain why they do not want to have a border wall. 

While President Trump is willing to shut down the government without wall funding, the Senate Ds will not give him the wall funding.

Trump ran on building a wall. Crossings are down where there is a physical wall. It appears to work. However, the Democrats do not see a need for a wall.  Quid pro quo... give wall funding, the government does not shut down. 
 

 

[WhitewalkerInPhilly]

1 minute ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Well, as Trump pointed out to Nancy today, 10 Democrats need to vote for wall funding in the Senate - which Chuckie will not allow (notice the lack of eye contact on Schumer's part when he speaks to Trump). The fact that the Democrats are unwilling to vote for wall funding, and cannot explain why they do not want to have a border wall. 

While President Trump is willing to shut down the government without wall funding, the Senate Ds will not give him the wall funding.

Trump ran on building a wall. Crossings are down where there is a physical wall. It appears to work. However, the Democrats do not see a need for a wall.  Quid pro quo... give wall funding, the government does not shut down. 
 

 

In the most obvious riposte: If the US government is already succeeding using $1.6 billion is border security funding, why do you need $5 billion? Is that worth stopping all security over?

 

To which I go to the itemized reasons this makes no sense:

 

A) Can you actually give me data as to how physical security has stopped crossings? This is a legitimate question, not a trap. I am rather curious if you have any facts that can be verified.

 

B) Bulls**t, the Dems can't explain why they don't want a border wall. Holy hell, this is the easier argument for a libertarian to make. It is:

• A massive government works project
• Will require the seizure of land from private citizens via eminent domain
• violates state's rights, as the federal government will be overriding the enumerated powers that they are supposed to have regarding enforcement
• even if it is built, it will require continual manpower assignment and maintenance
• you can do far better national security policing by taking equivalent funds and giving them to intelligence agencies and law enforcement
• a static emplacement like a wall is useless against catapults shooting drugs over the border, vast networks of cartel tunnels, air drops, naval crossings, smuggling through our ports and is just an god awful waste of money for an extremely limited and stationary structure.

I have long held that the Wall is all the stupidest parts of Democratic mismanagement, only now it's the Republican base's turn to be idiots.

[Tiberius]

Mexico will pay for the stupid wall! Four legs good two legs bad! 

[Deranged Rhino]

NPCinPhilly proving he's not an independent thinker. Just regurgitates the days talking points from his partisan camp and declares any information that runs contrary to it as lies. 

 

Sad and weak. 

[Tiberius]

Attacking the poster and not addressing his point simply because it does not lavish extreme praise on Trump? Boo 

[Deranged Rhino]

The poster has yet to engage honestly in any subject down here. NPCs don't converse. They preach. 

[Tiberius]

The poster made a good point, several actually. 

[Buffalo_Gal]

Just now, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

In the most obvious riposte: If the US government is already succeeding using $1.6 billion is border security funding, why do you need $5 billion? Is that worth stopping all security over?

 

To which I go to the itemized reasons this makes no sense:

 

A) Can you actually give me data as to how physical security has stopped crossings? This is a legitimate question, not a trap. I am rather curious if you have any facts that can be verified.

 

B) Bulls**t, the Dems can't explain why they don't want a border wall. Holy hell, this is the easier argument for a libertarian to make. It is:

• A massive government works project
• Will require the seizure of land from private citizens via eminent domain
• violates state's rights, as the federal government will be overriding the enumerated powers that they are supposed to have regarding enforcement
• even if it is built, it will require continual manpower assignment and maintenance
• you can do far better national security policing by taking equivalent funds and giving them to intelligence agencies and law enforcement
• a static emplacement like a wall is useless against catapults shooting drugs over the border, vast networks of cartel tunnels, air drops, naval crossings, smuggling through our ports and is just an god awful waste of money for an extremely limited and stationary structure.

I have long held that the Wall is all the stupidest parts of Democratic mismanagement, only now it's the Republican base's turn to be idiots.

a) Watch the video. Trump lists it in the first 5 minutes.

b )  I started to refute your points, but my goodness... very little of it made sense. Democrats have LOVED massive work projects in the past. The United States government is responsible for border security and has border crossings in many states. A federal work project is exactly what reimbursed eminent domain should be used for (not sure how useful that land is now to people who own it considering the dangerous cast of characters shuffling drugs and human traffic across their lands).

The Dems sure did like the idea of a physical barrier in 2006.  Of those 26 Ds voting yes, 5 are still in the Senate. If Chuckie doesn't have the political clout to round-up 5 yes votes to fund a wall and keep the government open, he is a weak leader.  

* Since I did the work of figure out who the yea votes for the Ds that were still in the Senate are, I will share:  Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, Ron Wyden, Thomas Carper, Debbie Stabenow
 

[keepthefaith]

Shut down?  Fine with me. We'll still have funds for Military and entitlements.  The rest can rot

53 minutes ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

Well, I have to admit that Schumer is laying it on thick, and I have little love for these two. But let's give credit where credit is due.

 

Mr. 45 has owned any impending shutdown.

 

https://thepoliticalinsider.com/trump-shutdown/

 

All I'm going to say is this: while the Republicans control both houses of Congress, and the executive branch until January 3rd...when it will control two of those three.

 

If they can't do anything until then, then yeah, the president needs to own up to his comments about how shutdowns are the president's fault.

 

The government continuing to run with no budget, at huge deficits and no border security would be far more disappointing to me.   Shut the ***** down!

[Deranged Rhino]

7 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

The poster made a good point, several actually. 

 

None of which he came to on his own. He regurgitated talking points hot off the press. That's not impressive. It's sycophantic. 

7 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

a) Watch the video. Trump lists it in the first 5 minutes.

b )  I started to refute your points, but my goodness... very little of it made sense. Democrats have LOVED massive work projects in the past. The United States government is responsible for border security and has border crossings in many states. A federal work project is exactly what reimbursed eminent domain should be used for (not sure how useful that land is now to people who own it considering the dangerous cast of characters shuffling drugs and human traffic across their lands).

The Dems sure did like the idea of a physical barrier in 2006.  Of those 26 Ds voting yes, 5 are still in the Senate. If Chuckie doesn't have the political clout to round-up 5 yes votes to fund a wall and keep the government open, he is a weak leader.  

* Since I did the work of figure out who the yea votes for the Ds that were still in the Senate are, I will share:  Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, Ron Wyden, Thomas Carper, Debbie Stabenow
 

 

 

 

It's a wasted effort, sadly. But a noble one. He's too far gone in his TDS to see reason or logic. He's propagandized to the max.

[3rdnlng]

16 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

The poster made a good point, several actually. 

How would you know?

[WhitewalkerInPhilly]

10 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

How would you know?

 

19 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

None of which he came to on his own. He regurgitated talking points hot off the press. That's not impressive. It's sycophantic. 

 

 

 

It's a wasted effort, sadly. But a noble one. He's too far gone in his TDS to see reason or logic. He's propagandized to the max.

Ok. Name the press. If this is "hot off the lib NPC press", tell me what it's from. 

 

Because actual, conservative government analysis couldn't come from me unless I know better than you. Which, let's be honest here, is not that hard

 

30 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

a) Watch the video. Trump lists it in the first 5 minutes.

b )  I started to refute your points, but my goodness... very little of it made sense. Democrats have LOVED massive work projects in the past. The United States government is responsible for border security and has border crossings in many states. A federal work project is exactly what reimbursed eminent domain should be used for (not sure how useful that land is now to people who own it considering the dangerous cast of characters shuffling drugs and human traffic across their lands).

The Dems sure did like the idea of a physical barrier in 2006.  Of those 26 Ds voting yes, 5 are still in the Senate. If Chuckie doesn't have the political clout to round-up 5 yes votes to fund a wall and keep the government open, he is a weak leader.  

* Since I did the work of figure out who the yea votes for the Ds that were still in the Senate are, I will share:  Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, Ron Wyden, Thomas Carper, Debbie Stabenow
 

Dude, there's a reason why I'm an independent. Just because Trump is unspeakably moronic doesn't make the Dems magically brilliant. They are simply the most ready way to avoid disaster.

 

They deserve to be called out for hypocrisy and bad ideas. 

 

I dont see how continued examination, debate and rejection of ideas is a bad thing.

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

18 minutes ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

Dude, there's a reason why I'm an independent.

 

You have a funny way of showing it. Let's test this premise: 

 

1) Do you believe in borders?

2) Do you believe that people the world over have a right to be Americans if they so choose?

[Buffalo_Gal]

18 minutes ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

 

Dude, there's a reason why I'm an independent. Just because Trump is unspeakably moronic doesn't make the Dems magically brilliant. They are simply the most ready way to avoid disaster.

 

They deserve to be called out for hypocrisy and bad ideas. 

 

I dont see how continued examination, debate and rejection of ideas is a bad thing.

 

 

3

Sorry sweetie, I am not a dude. ? The "Gal" in my handle should make that perfectly clear. 

[reddogblitz]

Serious question.  Can the president "shut down the government"?  I thought Congress had the power of the purse.

[njbuff]

It boggles my mind that the issue of border security is so divided that not even a little common sense comes into play.

 

And contrary to the left's beliefs, starting with these two parasites (Pelosi, a.k a. Skeletor, and Cryin Chuck), the President is 100% on this issue.

 

People wanting to enter our country need to be vetted. Case closed. Every other country in this world does this.

 

Why is this concept so hard for a Democrat to understand?

Edited December 11, 2018 by njbuff

[Koko78]

21 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

Serious question.  Can the president "shut down the government"?  I thought Congress had the power of the purse.

 

Yes and no. He can veto any continuing resolutions/budgets. The 'shutdown' is automatic when the government hits the artificially-created debt ceiling and cannot legally borrow any more money by selling treasury bonds.

 

I wonder if he will close unmanned free national parks/monuments by paying parks workers to erect physical barriers like Obama did.

[/dev/null]

37 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

Serious question.  Can the president "shut down the government"?  I thought Congress had the power of the purse.

 

Republican President = Republicans fault

Democrat President with Republican House = Republicans fault

Democrat President with Democrat House = Republicans fault

 

Haven't you been paying attention to The Narrative?

[Buffalo_Gal]

14 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

Yes and no. He can veto any continuing resolutions/budgets. The 'shutdown' is automatic when the government hits the artificially-created debt ceiling and cannot legally borrow any more money by selling treasury bonds.

 

I wonder if he will close unmanned free national parks/monuments by paying parks workers to erect physical barriers like Obama did.

 

That was one of the lowest things that "richard" did while president. Cost more money to close and guard them, but put a maximum hurt on the public.  Now, normally I would think a President would do something like that so the public would blame the House (Republicans) at the time, but honestly? With Obama? I am sure that petulant #@$!#@ loved causing maximum inconvenience and monetary harm to as many Americans as he possibly could, in the pettiest way possible. 

[Azalin]

30 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

I wonder if he will close unmanned free national parks/monuments by paying parks workers to erect physical barriers like Obama did.

 

 

What a fascinating dichotomy in building barriers.

[3rdnlng]

26 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

That was one of the lowest things that "richard" did while president. Cost more money to close and guard them, but put a maximum hurt on the public.  Now, normally I would think a President would do something like that so the public would blame the House (Republicans) at the time, but honestly? With Obama? I am sure that petulant #@$!#@ loved causing maximum inconvenience and monetary harm to as many Americans as he possibly could, in the pettiest way possible. 

He had a couple that leased property in Lake Mead evicted from their home just because it was on federal lands. They had lived there for decades. He also had restaurants closed in the Appalachians. Absolute dick.

[ALF]

3 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

You have a funny way of showing it. Let's test this premise: 

 

1) Do you believe in borders?

2) Do you believe that people the world over have a right to be Americans if they so choose?

 

I support a wall backed up by electronic surveillance . 

 

I support legal immigration and work permits as needed.

 

The $5B now and then more to finish the wall should come from less tax cuts not more borrowing.  jmo

 

 

[Cinga]

5 hours ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

violates state's rights, as the federal government will be overriding the enumerated powers that they are supposed to have regarding enforcement

States rights regarding immigration? You really are some kind of Stupid aren't you?

 

5 hours ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

A) Can you actually give me data as to how physical security has stopped crossings? This is a legitimate question, not a trap. I am rather curious if you have any facts that can be verified.

Let's see... countries with walls in this globalist society?

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-with-border-walls.html

 

You are not a libertarian, your either lying or fooling yourself. Your also not an independent because there is nothing in what you posted that is independent thought. You're just another democrat globalist

 

And finally,  Trump set Chucky up... Of course he is willing to veto a CR if it does not include funding for the wall. And if Chucky sticks to his guns, not giving it or even willing to negotiate, this shutdown belongs to him, not Trump.... But will we even notice? 

Edited December 12, 2018 by Cinga

[Doc Brown]

 

2 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

Serious question.  Can the president "shut down the government"?  I thought Congress had the power of the purse.

Yeah.  Reagan did it quite effectively at times.  Since then presidents have been more hesitant.

[Doc Brown]

13 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Well, as Trump pointed out to Nancy today, 10 Democrats need to vote for wall funding in the Senate - which Chuckie will not allow (notice the lack of eye contact on Schumer's part when he speaks to Trump). The fact that the Democrats are unwilling to vote for wall funding, and cannot explain why they do not want to have a border wall. 

While President Trump is willing to shut down the government without wall funding, the Senate Ds will not give him the wall funding.

Trump ran on building a wall. Crossings are down where there is a physical wall. It appears to work. However, the Democrats do not see a need for a wall.  Quid pro quo... give wall funding, the government does not shut down. 
 

 

I always suspected our politicians held private meetings to avoid being viewed as petulant and incompetent.  Trump having them broadcast publicly removes all doubt.  Also, Mike Pence is really on his A game here.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

Shut em down! Would save tons of money if the the government wasn't wasting our money.

 

 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

I would have paid any sum to see trump get up and pimp-slap schumer

 

[ALF]

It was so wild. It goes to show you: You get into a tinkle contest with a skunk, you get tinkle all over you."

 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/11/politics/pelosi-aide-trump-meeting-own-shutdown-wall-manhood/index.html

 

Pelosi pretty much summed it up 

[The_Dude]

15 hours ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

Well, I have to admit that Schumer is laying it on thick, and I have little love for these two. But let's give credit where credit is due.

 

Mr. 45 has owned any impending shutdown.

 

https://thepoliticalinsider.com/trump-shutdown/

 

All I'm going to say is this: while the Republicans control both houses of Congress, and the executive branch until January 3rd...when it will control two of those three.

 

If they can't do anything until then, then yeah, the president needs to own up to his comments about how shutdowns are the president's fault.

 

I wish Chuck and his piggly, ***** niece would just go away. 

[GG]

1 hour ago, ALF said:

It was so wild. It goes to show you: You get into a tinkle contest with a skunk, you get tinkle all over you."

 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/11/politics/pelosi-aide-trump-meeting-own-shutdown-wall-manhood/index.html

 

Pelosi pretty much summed it up 

 

I thought manhood was bad in the age of toxic masculinity?

 

Which is it, I'm losing score.

[Tiberius]

I think this made all of them look bad, but that is generally true of anyone that has to be associated with Trump. 

 

Not sure why they didn't keep throwing at him, "You said Mexico would pay for it." 

 

And I just loved how he made up total lies out of whole cloth. "We caught ten terrorists!" LOL 

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Donald Trump says Mexico is paying for the wall through his new trade deal

 

 

 

[Buffalo_Gal]

This opt-ed in the Chicago Tribune has a little somethin' for everyone! 

My personal "favorites":

? to the Nancy Pelosi "great lady" comment and    to the Pence "even without much help from that silent white-haired throw pillow in the room" comment.
 

Column: Chuck, Nancy, Donald and 'The Wall'
 

There was a moment in that Trump, Chuck and Nancy meeting about “The Wall” at the White House when I thought Nancy would surely win the day.
 

She’d put on her best Katherine Hepburn “On Golden Pond” voice, place her arm around Chuck, slumping in his chair, and tell him, ever-so-brightly, “You are my knight in shining armor.”
 

But it didn’t turn out that way, did it? President Trump won the meeting.
 

</snip>
 

Yet it was clear by the pained smirk on Chuck’s face, and by Pelosi’s bizarre vulgarity, babbling on as she did about skunk urine and manhood, that Trump won their meeting.
 

The way I see it, Democrats want unfettered illegal immigration, so the undocumented can be put on costly welfare and other social programs and thereby become a new crop of Democratic voters. It is a time-tested formula that has worked before. And the Republican establishment, which has long turned a blind eye to illegal immigration because their donors still want cheap labor, still hate Trump.
 

And American taxpayers?
 

A lot of them want a wall, they want an immediate stop to illegal immigration, and they don’t like being played.
 

</snip>
 

I will not repeat her quotes here. Cheering on a great lady like Pelosi as she debases herself by crawling through the mud of VulgarTowne is something I just won’t do. Feel free to Google her comments while you’re eating lunch.
 

But Trump won, even without much help from that silent white-haired throw pillow in the room. I believe the pillow may have been the vice president of the United States.
 

</snip>

[WhitewalkerInPhilly]

4 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

This opt-ed in the Chicago Tribune has a little somethin' for everyone! 

My personal "favorites":

? to the Nancy Pelosi "great lady" comment and    to the Pence "even without much help from that silent white-haired throw pillow in the room" comment.
 

Column: Chuck, Nancy, Donald and 'The Wall'
 

There was a moment in that Trump, Chuck and Nancy meeting about “The Wall” at the White House when I thought Nancy would surely win the day.
 

She’d put on her best Katherine Hepburn “On Golden Pond” voice, place her arm around Chuck, slumping in his chair, and tell him, ever-so-brightly, “You are my knight in shining armor.”
 

But it didn’t turn out that way, did it? President Trump won the meeting.
 

</snip>
 

Yet it was clear by the pained smirk on Chuck’s face, and by Pelosi’s bizarre vulgarity, babbling on as she did about skunk urine and manhood, that Trump won their meeting.
 

The way I see it, Democrats want unfettered illegal immigration, so the undocumented can be put on costly welfare and other social programs and thereby become a new crop of Democratic voters. It is a time-tested formula that has worked before. And the Republican establishment, which has long turned a blind eye to illegal immigration because their donors still want cheap labor, still hate Trump.
 

And American taxpayers?
 

A lot of them want a wall, they want an immediate stop to illegal immigration, and they don’t like being played.
 

</snip>
 

I will not repeat her quotes here. Cheering on a great lady like Pelosi as she debases herself by crawling through the mud of VulgarTowne is something I just won’t do. Feel free to Google her comments while you’re eating lunch.
 

But Trump won, even without much help from that silent white-haired throw pillow in the room. I believe the pillow may have been the vice president of the United States.
 

</snip>

I hear that weed really helps salve people who are delusional. Would you please speak to that?

5 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Donald Trump says Mexico is paying for the wall through his new trade deal

 

 

 

In short...you have cartoons, because the facts show how deluded you are

[boyst]

5 minutes ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

Derp derp derp derp Derp Derp Derp!  Derp derp, derp??  Derp.  Derp.

Goat Rodeo

A situation that is hopelessly ***** up. The worst of three stages of goat-ness. First is the Goat Rope, defined else where. 

Then there is the utilitraian Goat *****. This normally requires a serious amount of work to un*****. 

Lastly, there is the Goat Rodeo. The worst of the three, it is beyond even profanity. It describes a situation that involves many individuals screw ups, and implies that the ***** up is already well underway, meaning that there is no hope in stopping the mess. Usually said with a defeated tone:

[Buffalo_Gal]

I think there is something wrong with Nancy, either that or maybe her teeth just need to be adjusted? ?

 

 

[DC Tom]

2 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

I think there is something wrong with Nancy, either that or maybe her teeth just need to be adjusted? ?

 

 

 

Pelosi predicts we'll no longer have to put up with her *****?  Sign me up...

[B-Man]

1 hour ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

 

In short...you have cartoons, because the facts show how deluded you are

 

     In shorter, you don't seem to understand what the board is for.

[IDBillzFan]

On 12/11/2018 at 12:37 PM, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

Well, I have to admit that Schumer is laying it on thick, and I have little love for these two. But let's give credit where credit is due.

 

Mr. 45 has owned any impending shutdown.

 

Not sure if you realize this or not, but the number of people who genuinely care whether the government is shut down can fit on the head of a pin, and the number of people who care who's to blame is even smaller.

 

Get out. Walk around. Do some Christmas shopping. Visit some friends. Spread some cheer. It won't take long for you to figure out how little anyone cares about this. They may actually care about Russia more than they care about this. THAT is how little people care.

 

They didn't care about it when Obama shut it down, and they won't care about it when Trump shuts it down.

 

Find something significant to boo-hoo about.