davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Mar 18, 2019 8:24:35 GMT -8
I am not entirely certain, but I do believe money used to fund an emergency is not taken from some other budgeted line item.
There are a lot of unfunded liabilities that look a lot like a government slush fund for things like emergencies.
|
|
Bick
Administrator 
Posts: 6,901
|
Post by Bick on Mar 18, 2019 9:41:12 GMT -8
congress, unwilling to act, is now in a position to support that intent (which frustrates them that the president IS doing something where they would not), or try to wrest the job THEY ARE UNWILLING TO DO away from the President. given all this, I do not support the use of the Emergency Declaration in this regard, but I DO support someone, in this case, the President doing something to stem the flow of illegals into this country. A side benefit I see is, the frustration this causes those self-righteous, puffed up stuffed shirts in congress. He hasn't asked me yet, but if I were he, I'd take this to the people and have them put pressure on their representatives to pass legislation to properly secure our borders. To paraphrase his tweet... YOU have the power to secure the borders of YOUR country by requiring YOUR representatives to get to work on this. I could weasel my way to get this funded, but that would be tyrannical. The burden for supporting illegals in this country will fall squarely on all the taxpayers of this country if you do not act.Phone's ringing...it might be Don...stay tuned. |
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Mar 20, 2019 22:22:52 GMT -8
I think the most important reason why Trump's call to "Build the Wall" resonated with so many people in the country--and why they continue to support the building of physical barriers along the border--is not because they are racist or xenophobic or think these fences are some sort of silver bullet to solve the nation's problems. Rather it is because they don't trust Congress and/or future Presidents to seriously address illegal immigration.
"Comprehensive Immigration Reform" is code for amnesty first--and maybe we'll address the porous border somewhere down the road.
The Wall is a permanent thing--both symbolic and real--that cannot be undone or easily neglected in the future. It is not like the numerous empty promises made over the past 35 years--the footballs that Lucy then pulls away just before the kick through the goalpost.
It must be done.
|
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,901
|
Post by Bick on Mar 21, 2019 20:49:54 GMT -8
I agree it must be done. But WE must do it. Trump is approaching it like HE must do it. Probably the thing that will end up being what will stop him from being considered the GOAT president as it relates to modern time achievements.
|
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Mar 21, 2019 22:30:57 GMT -8
Point well taken. But isn't the President the closest thing to representing WE (that is, the states--via the Electoral College)? Even with a majority in the House of Representatives, short of electing a supermajority in the Senate, I'm not sure how else it gets done.
|
|
not4u13
Active Contributor
Posts: 74
|
Post by not4u13 on Mar 23, 2019 6:04:10 GMT -8
The majority of Americans oppose building a wall. If Trump took this to the people, he would lose. That's why Congress opposed it. Most people don't want it (or think it is too expensive).
|
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,901
|
Post by Bick on Mar 23, 2019 12:08:52 GMT -8
The majority of Americans oppose building a wall. If Trump took this to the people, he would lose. That's why Congress opposed it. Most people don't want it (or think it is too expensive). So what do most Americans want? Status quo? Trump backed off the great wall of China approach a while ago. He said a barrier... fence. I take that to mean border security of some sort. |
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Mar 23, 2019 23:30:03 GMT -8
The majority of Americans oppose building a wall. If Trump took this to the people, he would lose. That's why Congress opposed it. Most people don't want it (or think it is too expensive). If you're saying the President is proposing to build a concrete wall across every foot of the border with a Mexico, that was never the intention. And Trump already took this to the people--loudly and repeatedly--during the entire 2016 campaign--and he won. The current Democrat-controlled House of Representatives already approved over $1B for new border fencing, so I'm not sure how it can be said that Congress opposed in principle what it already approved. The fight was simply over how much would be completed. |
|
not4u13
Active Contributor
Posts: 74
|
Post by not4u13 on Mar 24, 2019 5:59:40 GMT -8
Trump has never been abundantly clear what he wants and we know the electorate is generally uninformed. Most people do want better border security and I've always been for strategically placed barriers, but Trump has long campaigned on wanting an impenetrable barrier along the entire border. He's going to have to do a lot more work to get people to believe he wants anything less than that. I'm not even convinced that Trump himself has backed off, but I do believe he has softened his approach, mostly because he now understands he will never get what he wants unless he changes what he says.
Trump is a liar and con man. He has proven that with his many business dealings over the years, including Atlantic City where he promised to build a parking garage but never did. He says whatever he thinks he needs to, in order to gain an agreement, then he will do whatever he wants after he gets the money. You can trust one thing about Trump, he will do whatever Trump wants.
If he wants support, he is going to have to come out and be very specific with what he intends to do with the money. Where he wants a barrier and what kind of barrier. Where he wants to improve electronic surveillance and what exactly that means. What is he going to do differently at border crossings. How is he going to address asylum seekers differently than he is today. How will his plan curb drug ans sex trade trafficking.
He won't do any of those things because he doesn't want to be held accountable for carrying out a specific plan. He wants the money to do whatever he thinks he should do and everyone else just needs to shut up and let him do it.
|
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,815
|
Post by MDDad on Mar 24, 2019 9:28:26 GMT -8
I've said it several times before and I'll say it again and again: Donald Trump will do whatever it takes to stroke his ego, further his brand, or line his pockets; and he will take whatever political or social position is necessary to do those three things. Furthermore, when it comes to expressing himself verbally, he has all the common sense and restraint of a ten-year-old.
|
|
|
|
Post by ProfessorFate on Mar 24, 2019 13:12:24 GMT -8
. He wants the money to do whatever he thinks he should do and everyone else just needs to shut up and let him do it. Not everyone...He wants the Dems to listen to what the Border Patrol wants. Who knows better than they do? The Dems refuse to listen to them because they support Trump's vision. |
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Mar 24, 2019 22:27:53 GMT -8
I've said it several times before and I'll say it again and again: Donald Trump will do whatever it takes to stroke his ego, further his brand, or line his pockets; and he will take whatever political or social position is necessary to do those three things. Furthermore, when it comes to expressing himself verbally, he has all the common sense and restraint of a ten-year-old. Couldn't the first two-thirds of the above statement could be applied to 90% of Congress, as well as Trump's four immediate predecessors? The last sentence seems a bit over the top and--to the extent that it is true--could also be applied to much of the Democratic leadership and most of their 2020 Presidential hopefuls. Trump didn't get to where he is without a profound skill set and an unwavering sense of purpose that puts 95% of the public to shame. How he has been able to carry on in the face of unprecedented vitriol directed at him, his wife, and his children is nothing short of amazing. And with the Left proposing a wholesale deconstruction of our constitutional republic, he is practically an Army of One standing athwart their designs. NeverTrumpers don't like Trump and think he is morally unfit. That's abundantly clear. But you also want better border security and--I assume--largely agree with the economic policies, SCOTUS appointments, and other initiatives taken by the President. The "friendly fire" seems counter-productive. I ask honestly and respectfully: What is his crime (figuratively speaking) that justifies its continuance? Look at the results and consider what the other side is offering. From any conservative perspective, supporting Trump--or at least giving him the benefit of the doubt---seems like an easy choice. |
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,815
|
Post by MDDad on Mar 25, 2019 10:39:01 GMT -8
The "friendly fire" seems counter-productive.
On the contrary, I think "friendly fire" and the presence of a "loyal opposition" are crucial to the survival and well-being of our republic. Without them, we become a mindless "go-along to get along" populace that is antithetical to a vibrant society. Without friendly fire, I fear (as Luca has already expressed) that this forum will become a mirror-image of TOB. There are times when I feel it already has, and that is very unappealing. Much like TOB, we spend the bulk of our time ridiculing or complaining about the other side, and that's not productive. How many times have we seriously discussed solutions to the illegal immigration problem, or any other social or political issues, rather than take the easy way out by insulting those that disagree with us?
I ask honestly and respectfully: What is his crime (figuratively speaking) that justifies its continuance?
I don't know what his crime is. But I do know that history and current celebrityville are rife with people who have committed no crime, but whose personal and moral shortcomings make them pretty reprehensible human beings. That's the bucket I put Donald Trump in.
Look at the results and consider what the other side is offering.
I think I've spent a lot of time looking at what the other side is offering, and that's why I'm on this side. But the "lesser of two evils" rationale has never been very compelling to me.
|
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Mar 25, 2019 19:58:21 GMT -8
I still think Trump deserves a lot more credit than you may be willing to concede but, on the whole, I agree with everything above. Well said--and necessary too.
TRUMP unites Servite and Mater Dei against the enemy within the gates. Pretty good for government work.....
|
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Mar 25, 2019 20:09:02 GMT -8
|
|
