Okay I don’t understand why they can’t compromise?
Some of these democrats act as though their party were never in favor of a wall or some sort of border security in previous administrations. Now because Trump wants it they are 100% against it? This is basically a bunch of kids fighting for the sake of fighting.
trump said Mexico is suppose to pay for it AND trump had two years with control of the Senate AND the House and couldn't get the republicans to pay for it
BLAME lies with trump and the republicans
Joined: 09 Jul 2010 Posts: 7844 Location: Orange County
Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 7:34 pm Post subject:
YSong wrote:
Okay I don’t understand why they can’t compromise?
Some of these democrats act as though their party were never in favor of a wall or some sort of border security in previous administrations. Now because Trump wants it they are 100% against it? This is basically a bunch of kids fighting for the sake of fighting.
Nice job omitting the part of the wall the democrats agreed to involving comprehensive immigration reform including a pathway to citizenship that the republicans rejected. If you choose to post in this thread come with complete information or GTFO. _________________ Don't let perfect be the enemy of good
Okay I don’t understand why they can’t compromise?
Some of these democrats act as though their party were never in favor of a wall or some sort of border security in previous administrations. Now because Trump wants it they are 100% against it? This is basically a bunch of kids fighting for the sake of fighting.
Perhaps this poisoning of the well by Republicans might jar your memory as to why: Mitch McConnell
And then the Republicans spent the next 8 years opposing anything Obama was for, even when Obama proposed things they'd traditionally fought for and offered it upon their terms. They still refused to agree because their stated goal was to do whatever possible to try to make Obama fail 100% of the time. The interesting part is the sudden case of amnesia when the shoe is on the other foot. _________________ I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail.
Okay I don’t understand why they can’t compromise?
Some of these democrats act as though their party were never in favor of a wall or some sort of border security in previous administrations. Now because Trump wants it they are 100% against it? This is basically a bunch of kids fighting for the sake of fighting.
In addition to what the others have already said, do we really want to set a precedent where a president can quite literally hold the government hostage unless he gets his way? Bills have been passed in the House to fund and re-open the government. These are measure the Senate has already approved. The only one against them? The President? Why? Because he won't get his way if he doesn't hold the government hostage to get it. Again, do we set a precedent where it's an effective tactic to do that? You ever hear the phrase, "we don't negotiate with terrorists?" You know why? Because it leads to more terrorism.
Both sides agree that more border security is needed. They disagree on how best to accomplish that (and I think only one side has a position that can withstand an even minimal fact check), but debate over how to do this is what they should be engaged in -- NOT holding the government hostage unless he gets HIS way.
The democrats are willing to fund lots of increased border security. Agents, technology, surveillance, repair of existing walls and fencing where it IS needed and where it DOES make sense. The problem will be addressed with what's on the table already -- the government doesn't need to be shut down over it, and it certainly doesn't need to stay shut down over it.
The only reason Trump doesn't accept what an honest, evidence-based analysis shows is a good system is because it's not his primary concern. His primary concern is HIS solution, because that's what he campaigned on. America isn't his priority -- HE is his priority.
So my first preference would be to open the government immediately, and implement a fact-based and evidence-based solution to the problem, even if it's not what he promised to get elected.
My second preference would be to open the government immediately, and engage in an honest debate over the best way to address the problem.
But it's not acceptable to hold the government hostage unless he gets his way. And it's not acceptable to even negotiate with someone who does that.
Because we don't negotiate with terrorists. It only breeds more terrorism.
Joined: 10 Dec 2006 Posts: 52754 Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 8:21 pm Post subject:
YSong wrote:
Okay I don’t understand why they can’t compromise?
Some of these democrats act as though their party were never in favor of a wall or some sort of border security in previous administrations. Now because Trump wants it they are 100% against it? This is basically a bunch of kids fighting for the sake of fighting.
Seriously? This is the nonsense you're dropping in with? FOX news much?
First of all, Democrats are all for border security and even support barriers in key areas. And not only that, they have been very clear about that support. So let's knock off the BS that they are now 100% against it. To think they are is either astoundingly foolish or intentionally trollish.
Secondly, there is only one "kid" in this whole mess and that is Trump. The Dems have been very adult and responsible, which was made very clear in the 16 mins we witnessed last night. _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Joined: 17 Nov 2007 Posts: 68375 Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 8:32 pm Post subject:
YSong wrote:
Okay I don’t understand why they can’t compromise?
Some of these democrats act as though their party were never in favor of a wall or some sort of border security in previous administrations. Now because Trump wants it they are 100% against it? This is basically a bunch of kids fighting for the sake of fighting.
Dems are in support of border security just not ancient methods. The Great Wall of China was a great fail. Today it's a tourist attraction. LINK _________________ Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Joined: 07 May 2014 Posts: 13823 Location: Boulder ;)
Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 8:51 pm Post subject:
YSong wrote:
Okay I don’t understand why they can’t compromise?
Some of these democrats act as though their party were never in favor of a wall or some sort of border security in previous administrations. Now because Trump wants it they are 100% against it? This is basically a bunch of kids fighting for the sake of fighting.
How many times do you let a bully punch you in the face?
If he negotiates just 2x per day do you say yes?
Trump is not negotiating
Americans do not want a wall
HISTORY will condemn any such wall
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90338 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 8:55 pm Post subject:
Trump and the GOP had two years to fund the wall, but now he’s going to (bleep) down the govenment when the Dems take one house? Why? Because the only thing he knows how to do is fight someone. He doesn’t want a wall, he wants his base to see him fighting for one. Greed and narcissism are all he is. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Joined: 07 May 2014 Posts: 13823 Location: Boulder ;)
Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 8:58 pm Post subject:
YSong wrote:
Okay I don’t understand why they can’t compromise?
Some of these democrats act as though their party were never in favor of a wall or some sort of border security in previous administrations. Now because Trump wants it they are 100% against it? This is basically a bunch of kids fighting for the sake of fighting.
“Of course the people don’t want war. But after all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger.”
Joined: 15 Sep 2012 Posts: 29802 Location: La La Land
Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 9:20 pm Post subject:
Omar Little wrote:
Trump and the GOP had two years to fund the wall, but now he’s going to (bleep) down the govenment when the Dems take one house? Why? Because the only thing he knows how to do is fight someone. He doesn’t want a wall, he wants his base to see him fighting for one. Greed and narcissism are all he is.
The plan is to make Democrats as unpopular as he is. Drive down voter turnout. Like 2016.
Little does he know. Conservatives in the 46 states not on the border will hate him for this.
The racism from low educated white voters in Ohio might help him in 2020. But Pennsylvania is a different story. Too many voters in the greater Philly and Pittsburgh area, and suburbia is starting to smell his bull. Florida is a toss up (like normal). _________________ "Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
Trump and the GOP had two years to fund the wall, but now he’s going to (bleep) down the govenment when the Dems take one house? Why? Because the only thing he knows how to do is fight someone. He doesn’t want a wall, he wants his base to see him fighting for one. Greed and narcissism are all he is.
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90338 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 11:11 pm Post subject:
No one is discussing anything but the shut down. That’s the goal here. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Just a quick reminder that the government has been shut down for nearly three weeks & federal workers will not get paid tomorrow because Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh criticized the president
To our right-leaning trolly friends who drop by to spew nonsense in this thread, the above actually happened. A deal was struck. All sides agreed, even Trump. But then two right-wing bile spewing pundits criticized him. And he's so emotionally fragile he couldn't tolerate the criticism. So Trump flip-flopped. He backed himself into a corner and said he would be proud to shut down the government. You could only be proud to shut down the government if: 1) you have no idea of the implications of shutting down government, 2) because you don't understand how the government actually works, 3) because you are a rich narcissist who lacks empathy and don't really care if regular people get hurt or the economy of the U.S. gets hurt, or if you dumb idea is bad policy, 4) you could use the shutdown to fund raise for your 2020 campaign by asking your marks to contribute for the sake of the wall.
To recap: I’m a licensed structural and civil engineer with a MS in structural engineering from the top program in the nation and over a decade of experience on high-performance projects, and particularly of cleaning up design disasters where the factors weren’t properly accounted for, and I’m an adjunct professor of structural analysis and design at UH-Downtown. I have previously been deposed as an expert witness in matters regarding proper construction of walls and the various factors associated therein, and my testimony has passed Daubert.
Am I a wall expert? I am. I am literally a court-accepted expert on walls.
Structurally and civil engineering-wise, the border wall is not a feasible project. Trump did not hire engineers to design the thing. He solicited bids from contractors, not engineers. This means it’s not been designed by professionals. It’s a disaster of numerous types waiting to happen.
What disasters?
Off the top of my head...
1) It will mess with our ability to drain land in flash flooding. Anything impeding the ability of water to get where it needs to go (doesn’t matter if there are holes in the wall or whatever) is going to dramatically increase the risk of flooding.
2) Messes with all kind of stuff ecologically. For all other projects, we have to do an Environmental Site Assessment, which is arduous. They’re either planning to circumvent all this, or they haven’t accounted for it yet, because that’s part of the design process, and this thing hasn’t been designed.
3) The prototypes they came up with are nearly impossible to build or don’t actually do the job. This article explains more:
It does not account for rework, complexities beyond the prototype design, factors to prevent flood and environmental hazard creation, engineering redesign... It’s going to be higher than $50bn. The contractors will hit the government with near CONSTANT change orders. “Cost overrun” will be the name of the game. It will not be completed in Trump’s lifetime.
I’m a structural forensicist, which means I’m called in when things go wrong. This is a project that WILL go wrong. When projects go wrong, the original estimates are just *obliterated*. And when that happens, good luck getting it fixed, because there aren’t that many forensicists out there to right the ship, particularly not that are willing to work on a border wall project— a large quotient of us are immigrants, and besides, we can’t afford to bid on jobs that are this political. We’re small firms, and we’re already busy, and we don’t gamble our reputations on political footballs. So you’d end up with a revolving door of contractors making a giant, uncoordinated muddle of things, and it’d generally be a mess. Good money after bad. The GAO agrees with me.
And it won’t be effective. I could, right now, purchase a 32 foot extension ladder and weld a cheap custom saddle for the top of the proposed wall so that I can get over it. I don’t know who they talked to about the wall design and its efficacy, but it sure as heck wasn’t anybody with any engineering imagination.
Another thing: we are not far from the day where inexpensive drones will be able to pick up and carry someone. This will happen in the next ten years, and it’s folly to think that the coyotes who ferry people over the border won’t purchase or create them. They’re low enough, quiet enough, and small enough to quickly zip people over any wall we could build undetected with our current monitoring setup.
Let’s have border security, by all means, but let’s be smart about it. This is not smart. It’s not effective. It’s NOT cheap. The returns will be diminishing as technology advances, too. This is a ridiculous idea that will never be successfully executed and, as such, would be a monumental waste of money. 🤷🏻♀️
This is set to public. Have a blast sharing it. _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Among my favorites: "The Lying Sanders Show". _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
To recap: I’m a licensed structural and civil engineer with a MS in structural engineering from the top program in the nation and over a decade of experience on high-performance projects, and particularly of cleaning up design disasters where the factors weren’t properly accounted for, and I’m an adjunct professor of structural analysis and design at UH-Downtown. I have previously been deposed as an expert witness in matters regarding proper construction of walls and the various factors associated therein, and my testimony has passed Daubert.
Am I a wall expert? I am. I am literally a court-accepted expert on walls.
Structurally and civil engineering-wise, the border wall is not a feasible project. Trump did not hire engineers to design the thing. He solicited bids from contractors, not engineers. This means it’s not been designed by professionals. It’s a disaster of numerous types waiting to happen.
What disasters?
Off the top of my head...
1) It will mess with our ability to drain land in flash flooding. Anything impeding the ability of water to get where it needs to go (doesn’t matter if there are holes in the wall or whatever) is going to dramatically increase the risk of flooding.
2) Messes with all kind of stuff ecologically. For all other projects, we have to do an Environmental Site Assessment, which is arduous. They’re either planning to circumvent all this, or they haven’t accounted for it yet, because that’s part of the design process, and this thing hasn’t been designed.
3) The prototypes they came up with are nearly impossible to build or don’t actually do the job. This article explains more:
It does not account for rework, complexities beyond the prototype design, factors to prevent flood and environmental hazard creation, engineering redesign... It’s going to be higher than $50bn. The contractors will hit the government with near CONSTANT change orders. “Cost overrun” will be the name of the game. It will not be completed in Trump’s lifetime.
I’m a structural forensicist, which means I’m called in when things go wrong. This is a project that WILL go wrong. When projects go wrong, the original estimates are just *obliterated*. And when that happens, good luck getting it fixed, because there aren’t that many forensicists out there to right the ship, particularly not that are willing to work on a border wall project— a large quotient of us are immigrants, and besides, we can’t afford to bid on jobs that are this political. We’re small firms, and we’re already busy, and we don’t gamble our reputations on political footballs. So you’d end up with a revolving door of contractors making a giant, uncoordinated muddle of things, and it’d generally be a mess. Good money after bad. The GAO agrees with me.
And it won’t be effective. I could, right now, purchase a 32 foot extension ladder and weld a cheap custom saddle for the top of the proposed wall so that I can get over it. I don’t know who they talked to about the wall design and its efficacy, but it sure as heck wasn’t anybody with any engineering imagination.
Another thing: we are not far from the day where inexpensive drones will be able to pick up and carry someone. This will happen in the next ten years, and it’s folly to think that the coyotes who ferry people over the border won’t purchase or create them. They’re low enough, quiet enough, and small enough to quickly zip people over any wall we could build undetected with our current monitoring setup.
Let’s have border security, by all means, but let’s be smart about it. This is not smart. It’s not effective. It’s NOT cheap. The returns will be diminishing as technology advances, too. This is a ridiculous idea that will never be successfully executed and, as such, would be a monumental waste of money. 🤷🏻♀️
Trump wants a literal wall. He couldn't care less about actual border security.
And adding to the issues brought up in what DMR posted above, the logistics are simply impossible.
First, you need to have some fun with eminent domain. Those lawsuits will tie things up for years, if not longer.
Okay, that part's over. You've got the land. Congratulations! Now how are you going to get the millions of tons of materials and equipment out there? Think a small country road can handle a large Caterpillar excavator and all of the rest of the toys that Trump likes to play in? Nope. Can't just fly them in either. Waaaaaaay too heavy. What's left? You need to build roads! Big ones. Welp, let's just add on more eminent domain fun to get the land worked out on those, followed by the funding and construction.
On to step 3. Who is going to build that wall? People! Lots of them. Doubt you can have them commute for hours each way to work, so that means putting them somewhere. I guess you could house all of them at the local Motel 6. Oops! That doesn't exist because quite a bit of this great big beautiful wall is out in the middle of nowhere. Guess you need a bit more land to build housing and the supporting infrastructure. Can't just run an extension cord and a hose from the local outlet to take care of the hundreds who are living there, so you need to add electrical, water and sewage. Not to mention waste disposal.
By now, you've probably dropped close to $250 billion over 10-15 years. The years are extremely optimistic.
But, hey! Now you can start to build that wall! Of course, after all of that you are only now starting to get into the issues listed in DMR's article.
Joined: 17 Nov 2007 Posts: 68375 Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 10:09 am Post subject:
VicXLakers wrote:
very short but to the point...
Jan 9, 2019
Congresswoman and Justice Democrat Ayanna Pressley made a powerful speech on the House floor.
I rise in opposition to the occupant of the White House...I see right through you and so does the American public
🤬You got to be kidding me! Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities towards the president.SMH _________________ Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
The idea of a virtual wall with the mothballed equipment from Afghanistan makes sense so trump won't entertain it...
trump just wants a foil
During the eight years of the Obama administration, there was an intensification of border enforcement that emphasized increased militarization, surveillance and armed personnel as opposed to physical wall expansion. This included the use of military technology and equipment repurposed from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to be deployed against migrant workers and refugees on the border.
Mr. Hoyt, a Border Patrol agent, is using equipment that the Defense Department brought back from Afghanistan, where it was used to track the Taliban. It is part of a potent arsenal that also includes towers, drones and aerostats — giant blimps attached to the ground that can hover as high as 5,000 feet. Helicopters using powerful infrared sensors and video cameras also patrol the skies.
The whole reason the "wall" entered Trump's campaign stump speech was because his advisers wanted him to talk about immigration and he would forget to bring it up. So they created a rhetorical device to help him remember -- since he liked to build things, they figured he would remember to talk about building a wall. Once it got applause, he added the Mexico paying for it part.
But there was never supposed to be an actual wall. It was a gimmick to help keep Trump on-message. AND IT'S STILL A GIMMICK.
The whole reason the "wall" entered Trump's campaign stump speech was because his advisers wanted him to talk about immigration and he would forget to bring it up. So they created a rhetorical device to help him remember -- since he liked to build things, they figured he would remember to talk about building a wall. Once it got applause, he added the Mexico paying for it part.
But there was never supposed to be an actual wall. It was a gimmick to help keep Trump on-message.
The whole reason the "wall" entered Trump's campaign stump speech was because his advisers wanted him to talk about immigration and he would forget to bring it up. So they created a rhetorical device to help him remember -- since he liked to build things, they figured he would remember to talk about building a wall. Once it got applause, he added the Mexico paying for it part.
But there was never supposed to be an actual wall. It was a gimmick to help keep Trump on-message. AND IT'S STILL A GIMMICK.
I wish Pelosi and Schumer had indicated that in their speech, and other Democrats should be saying that every single day, in addition to mentioning the stupidity of building a wall. _________________ ¡Hala Madrid!
I've come to a an updated theory of the case. Trump wants the shutdown, not for the wall, but so he can create further dysfunction and chaos in order to justify calling a national emergency -- so he can continue to expand his executive authority. He will try to transfer it to other areas, including using executive privilege to defend against the release of Mueller report and to block congressional Trump/Russia testimony by citing executive privilege. We just have to hope the courts and Pelosi/House stop him. Because the Republicans still don't give and (bleep) and are giving him a free pass to be a dictator while they continue to kiss his ass.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
