Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'IMO: In My Opinion' started by donutte, Jan 10, 2019.
Of course not. Because it won't hold up in court.
No, not because of a court outcome. Because it would set a horrible precedent for future Presidents, regardless whether or not it made it through the court system.
It's like Bush (Jr) wrote a lot of executive orders when he couldn't get Congress to accomplish anything, then Obama wrote more executive orders to get his way, and now Trump has written EO's to mainly undo Obama's and to get some things accomplished. Executive Orders....Bad Precedent. Bad governing. Doesn't look like it will end though, now that precedent is established as "normal".
Oh, sure, it's pretty authoritarian, but what else does anyone expect from Trump or the current GOP? If they were worried about the precedents Trump is setting they really should have said something before now.
Trump isn't "setting" precedents as much as following precedents set previously by both Democratic and Republican Presidents. Calling a National Emergency to get the pennies of needed border wall money would be a new one though, and not a good one.
Somebody cut down some Joshua trees in the park: National park visitors cut down protected Joshua trees during partial government shutdown
Unsurprisingly, the "build the wall" Gofundme has had to refund everybody's money. So the guy who organized it has started a non-profit you can send your donations to. That's not suspicious at all :/.
I think they all need to be LOCKED in a room (since someone can't be trusted not to leave in a huff) and hash this out. No leaving until it's done. Make sure they have bathroom access and food and water access, but no leaving allowed. If everyone else has to work without pay, these guys shouldn't be allowed to STOP working until they come to a resolution.
I think I had said this to my mom when they had a shutdown during Obama's term also. So this isn't just a Trump thing (although I do feel more strongly about locking them in this time around).
If they want to fund a $1,000,000 for the wall just to say they are giving funding for the wall, so be it. I don't think they should give the full amount or anywhere near it (seeing as it won't pay for the whole thing, AND the fact the amount requested has fluctuated so many times). Trump needs to stick around though so these talks can happen. Of course they don't go well when one of the key people can be bothered to stick around. A negotiation means they hash it out, not cave to his demands.
They didn't have anything to talk about after a few minutes. Nancy and Chuck demanded that Trump reopen the government before they would even talk about anything else. That was their ultimatum. Trump asked if he opened the government immediately, would they be willing to fund the wall or a barrier. Pelosi said, "No." (Not - "We can talk about it". Not - "We can negotiate something." Just flat, "No.") So Trump said, "Bye-bye".
Before the internet and before public demands for transparency in government, decision-makers did go off and work together and negotiate compromises. Now that everything is "public" with an audience always watching everything, all decisions are politicized with people only playing to their respective base constituencies who demand "Don't cave". "Not caving" is 50-50 in what the people want, which is not good for the whole country either way it goes.
Trump and Democratic leaders are equally to blame for this shutdown, and because America has been so drastically divided, these types of political antics are likely to only get worse no matters who is in office.
We get a government which reflects us.
Trump is 100% to blame for leaving the table. Regardless of anything else said. He should have stayed and showed us what a great negotiator he claims to always be.
Are they - Trump and Congress, all parties, not just one - responsible for this shutdown, absolutely. I say "all parties" since Sen. McConnell won't even allow the bill to proposed to be voted on in the Senate. So many roadblocks and yet they are all getting paid. I'll bet if they were not getting their paychecks they'd be quicker to come to a resolution. Although Trump probably would care less because he's got $$$$$ to cover his own wall, so definitely enough to pay his bills.
Maybe you should step out of your echo chamber once in a while. Just about every time I've heard or read a report about this the report has included the Dems counter offers.
It may be just political games to you but it isn't to me. I DO NOT want a 30 or 40 foot wall stretching against our entire, or a majority of, border with Mexico!
I am not opposed to beefing up our border security measures. But, I want whatever additional measures my tax dollars are used for to be well thought out measures that are deemed to be effective given whatever problem is deemed to exist at the point where they are put in place. I DO NOT want billions of dollars to be wasted on implementing a brainless campaign promise that was made solely for the purpose of firing up voters at a campaign rally.
And it isn't just "pennies" or a "trifling amount of money". It is what would be the start of billions upon billions of dollars. If Congress gives Trump his $5 billion now, he'll just keep demanding more and more every chance he gets and he'll know that holding government employee's paychecks hostage is a winning strategy for getting it.
The commonly tossed about money figure for building the wall is $25 billion. But that isn't the whole story. Anyone who looks at the pretty pictures you posted will notice there is an odd lack of existing walls or fences along the Texas part of the border. You're from Texas so you know, or should know, why that is. As opposed to along the Arizona and New Mexico border which is largely government owned land, much of the land in Texas where the wall would need to be is private property. Dozens of those property owners have already said they wouldn't sell to make way for the wall. Their property would have to be taken against their wishes using eminent domain power and that is something Texas landowners have a history of fighting in court. It will entail tying up a lot of government resources, both monetary and personnel, for years.
Of course our dear leader has a history of attempted imminent domain land seizures:
No, this issue cannot just be dismissed as politics.
I believe that I mentioned a few posts ago that Texans are equally committed to private property rights as they are to securing the border, which is why the map shows very little "wall" in Texas. I also already mentioned that opposition to eminent domain seizures in Texas would continue to be a issue against building a border barrier here. So they're mainly looking at repairing or replacing a porous 10-20 foot fence with a 30 foot more secure fence.
...and yes, it is all political games right now. It doesn't matter what YOU WANT. It doesn't matter what I WANT either. At the end of the day, we each get one vote across a few elections over time, and then it's out of our hands again. I don't live in some bubble thinking that I'm so important. Whoever wins elections, whether it's who I wanted or not, I just pray for God to give them the wisdom they need, according to His will, not mine.
Nancy and Chuck are being just as big of cry babies as Trump is. No different.
You're as welcome to your personal opinion as I am to mine.
Members of Congress represent the people of the United States. What they do, they do on our behalf. It matters very much what I want and whether what Congress does is what I want them to do.
Oh? Please provide an example of either of them storming out of a negotiation because they didn't get their way.
Not really on an individual basis. There is no individual control in a democratic vote. The majority of people win or lose as a collective, not the individual. When you end up on the losing side, you're best hope is that most people "vote better" next time.
Nancy's sarcastic joke about giving Trump "one dollar" and Chuck's 100% reversal on his stance on border security and immigration are equal to Trump ending one stalemated meeting abruptly. Both sides are equally dug in to their positions....because politics.
The FBI tells parents of kidnapped children not to pay a ransom, because that will lead to more kidnappings. Is it the FBI's fault or the parents' fault if the kidnappers hurt or kill the kid because they didn't get their demands?
If they give in to Trump now he'll keep holding the government hostage to get what he wants.
Exactly. Which is why just because they don't do what you want doesn't mean they are playing politics. They are doing their job. And I applaud their efforts because they are doing what I want them to do. That is why I vote. The party with the policies I favor won back a measure of control in Congress and the members of the House are pursuing an agenda different from that of the party that was defeated. As it should be.
All I want them to do is stop playing politics, make a decision on wall money or not, and reopen the government. ...but, again, it's not about what I want.
Obviously everybody wants decisions to be made. The problem is agreeing what the decisions should be. An objective view of the situation should make clear why that isn't easy to achieve.
If you truly want to live under a government where you won't see what you view as "playing politics", move to a country with an authoritarian leader. Trump will be glad to join you.
Politics is their job, they aren't playing.
And they offered a fine alternative. Somebody didn't want to talk about it.
.....people who didn't want to talk about "it" (giving one inch).
Washignton Post poll shows more people blame Trump for the shut down.
Looks like I'm in the 17% of Independent voters who thinks that Trump and the Democrats are equally to blame.