The Trump Shutdown

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, Swill Merchant said:

 

I hear what you're saying. You want a comprehensive bill that addresses the issue more thoroughly. But understanding that building a physical boundary now does not preclude the adoption of such policies later, I pose a question:

 

What is your best argument for denying funding for a physical barrier?

I would if it were just a 2000 mile wall across the entire Southern border.  Because that's not needed.  I would certainly vote to fund parts of it where absolutely required as I pointed out above.  One question on that:  would we need a wall in North Dakota or Montana?  What is the extent of illegal crossings/smuggling there, I wonder?

[Deranged Rhino]

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I would if it were just a 2000 mile wall across the entire Southern border.  Because that's not needed.  I would certainly vote to fund parts of it where absolutely required as I pointed out above.  One question on that:  would we need a wall in North Dakota or Montana?  What is the extent of illegal crossings/smuggling there, I wonder?

 

Many multitudes less crosses from the north vs the south. Why? The difference in law enforcement and stability in Canada versus Mexico.

[Swill Merchant]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

I would if it were just a 2000 mile wall across the entire Southern border.  Because that's not needed.  I would certainly vote to fund parts of it where absolutely required as I pointed out above.  One question on that:  would we need a wall in North Dakota or Montana?  What is the extent of illegal crossings/smuggling there, I wonder?

So basically, you think congress should fund the President's proposed barrier, and you think we should look into building one on the northern border too.

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, Swill Merchant said:

So basically, you think congress should fund the President's proposed barrier, and you think we should look into building one on the northern border too.

No.  I do not think the Congress should fund the President's proposed barrier, because I don't know what his proposed barrier is because he seemingly changes his mind every day on what that is.  My understanding is he wants a 2000 mile long beautiful wall along the entire Southern border. I don't feel that's necessary.  I would fund what the professionals suggest is absolutely required in certain areas.

 

I mention the Northern border because if we're going to talk about protecting our country against drugs, potential terrorists coming across, etc. there are miles of unsecured border on our Northern border as well.  Should we not also be concerned there?

5 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Many multitudes less crosses from the north vs the south. Why? The difference in law enforcement and stability in Canada versus Mexico.

Good point.  But one of the arguments given when the statistic about only 6 folks of watch lists crossed the Southern border is that if even one gets by and commits a terrorist act that it's one too many.  Should that logic not also apply to the Northern border?

[Deranged Rhino]

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Good point.  But one of the arguments given when the statistic about only 6 folks of watch lists crossed the Southern border is that if even one gets by and commits a terrorist act that it's one too many.  Should that logic not also apply to the Northern border?

 

It should, and for the most part does. But we both agree that building a wall just to build a wall is a waste of resources. You do not need a wall in the north at present from everything I've gathered - though to be fair, I have not spoken to the men and women who patrol the northern border as often as I do those who work on the southern border (I'm in SoCal). 

 

Now, things might change if we secure (more properly) the southern border. The lanes will change, perhaps more people will try to cross in the north and then we'll have to reassess it in a few years. We can't predict the counter moves the bad guys (smugglers/traffickers not immigrants) will make. 

[whatdrought]

8 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

No.  I do not think the Congress should fund the President's proposed barrier, because I don't know what his proposed barrier is because he seemingly changes his mind every day on what that is.  My understanding is he wants a 2000 mile long beautiful wall along the entire Southern border. I don't feel that's necessary.  I would fund what the professionals suggest is absolutely required in certain areas.

 

I mention the Northern border because if we're going to talk about protecting our country against drugs, potential terrorists coming across, etc. there are miles of unsecured border on our Northern border as well.  Should we not also be concerned there?

Good point.  But one of the arguments given when the statistic about only 6 folks of watch lists crossed the Southern border is that if even one gets by and commits a terrorist act that it's one too many.  Should that logic not also apply to the Northern border?

 

Just to check, what percentage of your house is surrounded by walls? I mean, the wind primarily blows from the west. Why not only build a western facing wall and have three open sides. 

 

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Now, things might change if we secure (more properly) the southern border. The lanes will change, perhaps more people will try to cross in the north and then we'll have to reassess it in a few years. We can't predict the counter moves the bad guys (smugglers/traffickers not immigrants) will make. 

 

Maybe the real solution is the China way- Just execute drug smugglers. 

Edited January 16, 2019 by whatdrought

[TH3]

21 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Never gonna happen.  Both parties want to maintain immigration reform as an election issue - actually reforming immigration means they have one less issue to rile up their base.  

Huh....I seem to remember to Senate passed a comprehensive bill but the "freedom" caucus would not let Bohner bring it to the floor......as it would have passed.....the Hastert rule....a real gem....40 congressmen doing god's work....

[B-Man]

ROGER SIMON: May the Shutdown Go On Forever.

 

FTA:

 

the shutdown should be about much more than the wall and border security.  

Serious as they may be, they are what the shrinks call the "presenting complaint."  The real issue is the function of government itself -- what's important and what's not. A shutdown can serve as a living laboratory for examining the question of what is actually worthwhile that is missing because of that event.  I daresay that most outside the Beltway would be hard pressed to find anything. (A fair number of these people can get around the National Parks by themselves, especially in the days of GPS.)

 

Both sides fear shutdowns not just because of that nauseatingly tedious inter-party blame game, but more importantly because it exposes this bloat and who caused it (i.e., who paid for what).  This is the Deep State in action, in the off-chance anyone hasn't noticed.  What has been created by our government over decades is a self-preservation machine immune to the normal capitalist processes of creative destruction that have largely improved society over centuries, enriching almost everyone and extending life expectancy.

 

 

.

 

 

[snafu]

50 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Never gonna happen.  Both parties want to maintain immigration reform as an election issue - actually reforming immigration means they have one less issue to rile up their base.  

 

...or they could pass a crappy solution and blame each other for it and make fixing it their election issue.  So, while highly unlikely, it could happen.

 

[DC Tom]

1 minute ago, snafu said:

 

...or they could pass a crappy solution and blame each other for it and make fixing it their election issue.  So, while highly unlikely, it could happen.

 

 

Like DACA?  How'd that go?  

 

These two parties can't even ***** up without ***** it up.

[snafu]

6 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Like DACA?  How'd that go?  

 

These two parties can't even ***** up without ***** it up.

 

I don't recall a DACA bill being debated on the floor, or voted upon -- or being very bi-partisan for that matter.

The one I had in mind was the ACA repeal.  That is a cluster ***** that will yield eternal stump time.

 

 

 

[WhitewalkerInPhilly]

5 hours ago, Swill Merchant said:

If you just stretch a little further I believe you can reach the straw.

Well, it seems that you are used to bending over and taking it.

[Doc Brown]

Damn.  Pelosi.  Where was this fight  from the Dems nine years ago?

[boyst]

4 minutes ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

Well, it seems that you are used to bending over and taking it.

Wow. Witty comeback. If anyone knows men bent over it's you, I reckon as the position seems to be one forced upon you as you meander down the balloon knot blvd. getting reamed by everyone.

 

Try harder in your efforts to insult. That was terrible.

[WhitewalkerInPhilly]

3 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

Wow. Witty comeback. If anyone knows men bent over it's you, I reckon as the position seems to be one forced upon you as you meander down the balloon knot blvd. getting reamed by everyone.

 

Try harder in your efforts to insult. That was terrible.

I don't know, you would know about blowing on immature knots...

[LB3]

Always funny to me to see NPC's claim to support gays in one breath and insinuate someone is gay as a way of insulting them in the next.

[boyst]

2 minutes ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

I don't know, you would know about blowing on immature knots...

Actually, I wouldn't. #fakenews retard.

 

Try again.

 

But, at least I can be creative while you suckle off the lowest hanging fruit of insults which is to call people gay.  I guess that's just repressing some inner thoughts.  

 

Why do the homos threaten you?  Why are you scared?

2 minutes ago, LBSeeBallLBGetBall said:

Always funny to me to see NPC's claim to support gays in one breath and insinuate someone is gay as a way of insulting them in the next.

I am sure NPC supports the gays. I am sure he has a card to all the glory holes that gets punched every time he visits.

 

And by card: I mean his ass

And by punched: I mean ***** 

[Deranged Rhino]

54 minutes ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

Well, it seems that you are used to bending over and taking it.

 

NPCinPhilly fails to remember that this kind of joke can get you fired from work, outcast from your social groups, and be held over your head for years. 

 

Why does NPCinPhilly forget such a fundamental rule of progressive facism? Because he's an NPC. Incapable of independent thought as he continues to prove with each and every post.

[B-Man]

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

NPCinPhilly fails to remember that this kind of joke can get you fired from work, outcast from your social groups, and be held over your head for years. 

 

Why does NPCinPhilly forget such a fundamental rule of progressive facism? Because he's an NPC. Incapable of independent thought as he continues to prove with each and every post.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

 

[DC Tom]

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

Except half the people in the country think this is justified on the grounds of protecting the other half the country from his Russian propaganda.

 

On a different note, I just read that Trump approved a quarter-billion dollar bailout of US bomb makers (for the AF, Navy, and such).  During a shut-down.  If Democrats had ANY brains, they'd run with that story, as "Trump spent money on bombs while federal workers aren't getting paid."  

 

They'll stick with "Orange Man Bad" of course, because they're idiots.

[Foxx]

10 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

i wonder what security they had whilst partying down in PR.

[B-Man]

Looks like Donald Trump just threw a wrench in Dems’ shutdown narrative

 

Looks like congressional Dems will have to find another shutdown talking point now that Donald Trump has just signed this bill into law:

 

So much for democrat propaganda that he'd refuse to sign this.

 

 

 

 

Dan Bongino drops a hammer on Nancy Pelosi’s excuse for need to postpone Trump’s SOTU

 

 

Former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino’s eyes rolled hard at Pelosi’s letter to Trump:

Dan Bongino

✔@dbongino

 

The Secret Service’s security plan for the SOTU will not change due to the partial shutdown. Pelosi knows this and yet she decided to fabricate a story in order to hurt Trump. Pathetic.

 

12.6K

1:33 PM - Jan 16, 2019

 

 

According to the Secret Service, they’d be on the job and ready:

 

Pelosi hid from #AngelMoms yesterday--Moves to cancel #SOTU today, rather than sit on her hands as @POTUS introduces them at the SOTU .

 

 

 

PELOSI LIED! DHS Say There Is “No Security Problem for the SOTU” (VIDEO)

 

 

 

.

Edited January 16, 2019 by B-Man

[plenzmd1]

Now this poop is getting real.. WTF both parties..stop this maddness

 

https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2019/01/16/atlas-brew-works-sues-federal-government-over.html

[snafu]

58 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

 

Trump can always deliver a written address (like they used to do) and deliver a speech from the Oval Office.

I'm sure it would be televised the same way the State of the Union is.

 

 

 

 

[ExiledInIllinois]

Keep hope alive Brutha PPPers!

 

Ah... Shucks... FORWARD my delusional conservatives...

 

https://federalnewsnetwork.com/government-shutdown/2019/01/furloughed-feds-wont-be-rifed-if-government-shutdown-extends-past-30-days-omb-says/

 

"...OPM’s 2015 guidance on shutdown furloughs also clarifies the matter.

“Reductions in force furlough regulations and SES competitive furlough requirements are not applicable to emergency shutdown furloughs because the ultimate duration of an emergency shutdown furlough is unknown at the outset and is dependent entirely on congressional action, rather than agency action,” OPM guidance reads. “The RIF furlough regulations and SES competitive furlough requirements, on the other hand, contemplate planned, foreseeable, money-saving furloughs that, at the outset, are planned to exceed 30 days.”

Title 5 statute describes how and when agencies should consider laying off certain groups of employees from their competitive levels if a furlough lasts more than 30 says, or due to a demotion, separation or reassignment requiring job displacement. Agencies can also consider layoffs if there’s a lack of work, shortage of funds or reduced personnel ceiling. Agency reorganizations or position reclassifications could also prompt a layoff, according to federal statue.

RIFs typically go into effect within 180 days.

But Title 5 RIF regulations apply to situations where an agency knows how long it plans to furlough its employees. Some agencies in 2013, for example, were forced to furlough their employees due to the effects of sequestration. The possibility of targeted layoffs was real for some agencies at the time, including the Defense Department, which warned of RIFs in 2014 if sequestration had continued...Read on!"

[DC Tom]

3 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Keep hope alive Brutha PPPers!

 

Ah... Shucks... FORWARD my delusional conservatives...

 

https://federalnewsnetwork.com/government-shutdown/2019/01/furloughed-feds-wont-be-rifed-if-government-shutdown-extends-past-30-days-omb-says/

 

"...OPM’s 2015 guidance on shutdown furloughs also clarifies the matter.

“Reductions in force furlough regulations and SES competitive furlough requirements are not applicable to emergency shutdown furloughs because the ultimate duration of an emergency shutdown furlough is unknown at the outset and is dependent entirely on congressional action, rather than agency action,” OPM guidance reads. “The RIF furlough regulations and SES competitive furlough requirements, on the other hand, contemplate planned, foreseeable, money-saving furloughs that, at the outset, are planned to exceed 30 days.”

Title 5 statute describes how and when agencies should consider laying off certain groups of employees from their competitive levels if a furlough lasts more than 30 says, or due to a demotion, separation or reassignment requiring job displacement. Agencies can also consider layoffs if there’s a lack of work, shortage of funds or reduced personnel ceiling. Agency reorganizations or position reclassifications could also prompt a layoff, according to federal statue.

RIFs typically go into effect within 180 days.

But Title 5 RIF regulations apply to situations where an agency knows how long it plans to furlough its employees. Some agencies in 2013, for example, were forced to furlough their employees due to the effects of sequestration. The possibility of targeted layoffs was real for some agencies at the time, including the Defense Department, which warned of RIFs in 2014 if sequestration had continued...Read on!"

 

That's too bad.  An imminent RIF might have prompted the toddlers in Congress and the White House to do something.

[ExiledInIllinois]

2 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

That's too bad.  An imminent RIF might have prompted the toddlers in Congress and the White House to do something.

I agree.  But... Nope... Let it ride now.

 

"The Art of the Deal."

 

By: A Terrible Two-Year Old

[GG]

6 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

That's too bad.  An imminent RIF might have prompted the toddlers in Congress and the White House to do something.

He can still RIF.  They'd just get 1 month of back pay, plus severance

[The_Dude]

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/01/10/politics/shutdown-effects-list/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F

 

I didn’t pay myself last week because I wasn’t sure if I’d have enough to pay my payroll taxes on the 15th. 

 

I hate the IRS. I hope they all starve. 

 

Boo hoo, they missed a paycheck with their cushy government job. It’s almost like they’re being subjected to the horrors of the — gasp — private sector. 

 

Ive literally kicked in 1000 doors for Uncle Sam and does he care? Nope. He just stops by on the 15th of every month to shake me down. ‘B word, you got my money? I’m gonna redistribute it to some lazy communist that doesn’t work but who voted for a politician that promised their ghetto-ass your money.’ Cause god knows the ghetto savages need my money more than I deserve it. 

Edited January 16, 2019 by The_Dude

[B-Man]

Pelosi’s stunt is just more progressive de-platforming

FTA:

 

All of the Post’s left-wing opinion writers seem very enthusiastic about this plan to take away Trump’s platform. That’s not really a surprise if you’ve been paying attention to the left’s behavior for the past couple of years. De-platforming is all the rage with college revolutionaries.

 

Of course, Pelosi doesn’t actually have the power to stop Trump from speaking. The president can hold a State of the Union-style speech anywhere he wants, minus the trappings and the Democrats. He could hold a speech it in the White House or at the San Diego border for that matter. But give Pelosi credit for trying.

 

If Trump were smart he’d lean into this resistance. Holding the speech in the White House in front of a select audience that applauds everything he says will feel canned and inauthentic, like a sitcom laugh-track. He’d be better off selecting a public venue and letting the resistance fill it with trolls in pink hats. Let the Democratic base finish the job Pelosi started. Let them scream and interrupt to their heart’s desire. Granted, Trump probably wouldn’t be able to finish his speech but the spectacle of him being shouted down would remind a lot of Americans what the far left is about these days.

[The_Dude]

3 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

Except half the people in the country think this is justified on the grounds of protecting the other half the country from his Russian propaganda.

 

On a different note, I just read that Trump approved a quarter-billion dollar bailout of US bomb makers (for the AF, Navy, and such).  During a shut-down.  If Democrats had ANY brains, they'd run with that story, as "Trump spent money on bombs while federal workers aren't getting paid."  

 

They'll stick with "Orange Man Bad" of course, because they're idiots.

 

The only reason I read this drivel was to see if there was something I could mock you with. 

 

But thats actually a perfect take and point. 

 

Its been wonderful for Trump having enemies who never know which front to fight him on. 

 

...oh wait. Just got it. Thought of something witty. Hey Tom, you’re a woman, Tammy. ? holy ***** that was good!

Edited January 17, 2019 by The_Dude

[Buffalo_Gal]

Anecdotal ...

So tonight at dinner I hear someone mention "Nancy Pelosi" so my ears perk up (because I'm nosey, and they were not quiet). There was a table of five two seatings away from us making no effort to lower their voices as they discussed how ridiculous it was for Nancy Pelosi to disinvite Trump for the state of the union, with chirping and chiming from the others at the table about the Democrats "not wanting border security."

Now for all I know this lady was the head of the local Republican party, and she was out to dinner with staff.

But, that would not explain the second table we overheard on our way out the door complaining about "the Democrats not wanting to open the government".

It is possible more people are paying attention to this shut down than I would have supposed, and it is also possible that many people are not blaming the Rs nor Trump, in spite of what the MSM is spewing.

(This is Florida though, so who knows.)

[ExiledInIllinois]

10 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Anecdotal ...

So tonight at dinner I hear someone mention "Nancy Pelosi" so my ears perk up (because I'm nosey, and they were not quiet). There was a table of five two seatings away from us making no effort to lower their voices as they discussed how ridiculous it was for Nancy Pelosi to disinvite Trump for the state of the union, with chirping and chiming from the others at the table about the Democrats "not wanting border security."

Now for all I know this lady was the head of the local Republican party, and she was out to dinner with staff.

But, that would not explain the second table we overheard on our way out the door complaining about "the Democrats not wanting to open the government".

It is possible more people are paying attention to this shut down than I would have supposed, and it is also possible that many people are not blaming the Rs nor Trump, in spite of what the MSM is spewing.

(This is Florida though, so who knows.)

Or you are in a Republican Bubble.

 

Where was this?

Exactly where in Fla...

[Koko78]

If I were Cocaine Mitch, I'd invite Trump to deliver his speech from the floor of the Senate chamber. Invite as much of the House as can be accommodated in the Senate chamber/gallery, minus the Democrat leadership.

[Buffalo_Gal]

Trump should reschedule the SOTU... and have it during half time at the Super Bowl ? 

Nancy P. has left the decision making for the guest list and venue of the SOTU address exclusively in the hands of President Donald Trump - master marketer and showman. Smart Nancy, real smart. 

I am gonna run out of popcorn if this shut down lasts much longer. ?
 

[plenzmd1]

6 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Trump should reschedule the SOTU... and have it during half time at the Super Bowl ? 

Nancy P. has left the decision making for the guest list and venue of the SOTU address exclusively in the hands of President Donald Trump - master marketer and showman. Smart Nancy, real smart. 

I am gonna run out of popcorn if this shut down lasts much longer. ?
 

think you might enjoy this article... 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/she-wields-the-knife-pelosi-moves-to-belittle-and-undercut-trump-in-shutdown-fight/2019/01/16/e6861fbe-19b0-11e9-88fe-f9f77a3bcb6c_story.html?utm_term=.3e1f739d2000

[Buffalo_Gal]

Just now, plenzmd1 said:

think you might enjoy this article... 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/she-wields-the-knife-pelosi-moves-to-belittle-and-undercut-trump-in-shutdown-fight/2019/01/16/e6861fbe-19b0-11e9-88fe-f9f77a3bcb6c_story.html?utm_term=.3e1f739d2000

Or this! (thread)
 

 

[Swill Merchant]

7 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Or this! (thread)
 

 

She was wise to walk that one back. That was the kind of move that exposes their true nature to moderate Dems and independents who are otherwise inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt

[B-Man]

Quote

 

Mark Meadows‏Verified account @RepMarkMeadows 3h3 hours ago

 

Nancy Pelosi's claim that she's canceling the State of the Union over "security concerns" related to the shutdown would almost be believable--if she hadn't already scheduled and invited the President to speak on January 3rd, when the shutdown was 2 weeks old

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

Poll: Just 6 percent of voters say shutdown has affected them 'a lot'

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/poll-just-6-percent-of-voters-say-shutdown-has-affected-them-a-lot

 

The new Morning Consult/POLITICO poll finds that the largest number of voters, 40 percent, say the shutdown has "not at all" affected them or their families, and 26 percent say there hasn't been much impact. Another 19 percent say they've seen only "some" impact.

 

The data suggest that even though voters broadly place more blame on President Trump for the shutdown, there's no particular sense of urgency to resolve it.

 

Right now, each party's base pretty much agrees with their side's position, so from a political perspective, there's still no incentive to compromise. At the same time, lawmakers aren't feeling much pressure from voters to resolve the issue because the overwhelming majority of the population is unaffected.

 

 

.

Edited January 17, 2019 by B-Man