BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

Mr. Luddite[_4_]

On 12/13/2018 12:46 PM, Its Me wrote:
On Thursday, December 13, 2018 at 12:34:21 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 12/13/2018 12:19 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 01:06:18 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On Wednesday, December 12, 2018 at 7:38:05 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 18:24:53 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/12/2018 5:48 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 13:27:17 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 12:16:27 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 07:39:39 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 12/12/18 7:35 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 12/12/2018 7:15 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
...Trump shoveling his usual bull**** and Nancy Pelosi calling him out
and shutting him down.

from the WashPost:

Donald Trump, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority
Leader Charles E. Schumer berated each other on camera Tuesday over
Trumpâ€™s border wall, an Oval Office spectacle that underscored the
distance between the two sides as they confront a fast-approaching
deadline for a partial government shutdown.

The stunning public spat, during which Schumer accused the president
of throwing a â€œtemper tantrum,â€ ended with Trump declaring heâ€™d be
proud to shut down the government to get the money he wants for his
long-promised U.S.-Mexico border wall. If the president follows
through on the threat, about 25 percent of the federal government
would begin to run out of money on Dec. 21, putting hundreds of
thousands of federal workers at risk of getting furloughed without pay
just before Christmas.

The two sides remain billions apart on border security â€” the president
is demanding $5 billion for a wall, and Democrats will offer no more
than $1.3 billion for fencing â€” and Tuesdayâ€™s talks brought them no
closer to a resolution. The three leaders pointed fingers, raised
their voices and interrupted one another repeatedly as they fought
over policy and politics, laying bare their differences for all to see.

Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Schumer (D-N.Y.) had not expected the session to
be televised and repeatedly asked Trump to take the discussions
off-camera. But the president allowed the acrimonious encounter to
continue for nearly 20 minutes before kicking the media out of the
Oval Office.

As the argument dragged on, Schumer lectured Trump that â€œElections
have consequences, Mr. President.â€

heh heh heh... Gee, Trump said about 100 times that "Mexico would pay
for" his wall. Too funny.

If I were Trump at that meeting I would have encouraged either of them
(but especially Schumer)Â* that if they/he think they have a better
solution they should run for POTUS in 2020 and wrestle with the problem.
They won't of course.Â* It would expose them again as being the
hypocrites that they are.Â* Their only objective is to oppose *anything*
Trump wants to do and to hell with what is in the best interests of the
country.

No one wants Trump's wall, except for Trump. No one wants a government
shutdown, except for Trump. And Mexico ain't paying for Trump's wall.

I think the "wall" is stupid too but there are real things we could do
to strengthen our borders.

I don't think the wall's stupid. If nothing else, it slows 'em down a bit.

I don't really believe that. lowing is not stopping and if you are not
stopping them you are just wasting time and money.
I really think it would be better to make it easier to get in legally
if you are actually looking for work and bring the hammer down on
people who come in illegally.
The immigrants who are taking jobs from Americans come in on H1B visas
because they will work an IT job for half of what we need to pay an
American. There is not a lot of danger of Americans who want to pick
tomatoes in Immokalee being put out of work when someone comes here
from Mexico to do it.

Neither you nor I or Pelosi, Schumer or Trump are qualified to know what
works and what doesn't work. The people on site who are actually
patrolling the border know better than any of us and they unanimously
say a wall is effective and needed.

I'd defer to their experiences.

To accomplish the mission of guarding a wall out in the wilds of
Arizona they are probably right but most illegals in this country
entered legally and over stayed their visa.

I don't know about "most" but they do not represent the bulk of
undocumented residents that anyone is concerned about. They
may be "illegal" in the sense that they overstayed their visa
but, as you point out, they originally entered *legally* and
were subject to some level of vetting.

The concern is the hundreds of people a day who are entering
*illegally* with no vetting at all and, when captured, become
wards of the USA until a court hearing can be scheduled.

Until Trump came along they had catch and release. They would just
write them a ticket and turn them loose, hoping they showed up for the
hearing. The guy who did stick around when my wife's club was "raided"
was turned loose right on the spot after they took his illegal SS and
green card. He still had his illegal Fl driver's license. He showed up
a few days later with a new ID but they wouldn't hire him.

But virtually *all* the people illegally entering are requesting amnesty
(as instructed by those making their "arrangements"). Our laws still
require a court hearing to determine eligibility, even though over
60 percent are *not* eligible. It has clogged up the court system
needlessly and delays claims for those who are legitimately eligible.

Better to build a wall that prevents them from illegally
entering in the first place and rely on point of entry entrance as our
laws call for.

An argument can be made as to the effectiveness of a wall but that's a
different issue. Those patrolling the border claim a wall *is* not only
effective but much needed to get this immigration issue under control.

Did you see the recent news story about a group of those marchers at the border that had demanded immediate entry or $50,000 each to return to their home countries. What a joke. How about a cheese sandwich and a swift kick in the ass.

I wouldn't waste the cheese sandwich.