Fed employees - shutdown stories

[msilenus]

Why do you see that?  Democrats have approved billions for border security, including new fencing, on multiple occasions.  Trump keeps turning them down.  He turned down the 1.3b in the current House budget bill, he turned down the 2.7b offerred to Mike Pence two weeks ago, and he turned down the $25b the democrats offered him last year in exchange for a DACA fix.

I think democrats will absolutely give him border wall funding, as soon as he's willing to negotiate instead of just make demands.  Our immigration problems are enormous, and will not be solved by a wall.  We need a DACA fix.  We need more H-2 visas.  We need to stop separating children from their parents and locking them in cages.  We need seasonal greencards to meet unmet demand for labor in the ag industry.  We need funding to expand the immigration courts to deal with the backlog of asylum seekers.  So far, Trump has refused to offer ANY of that in exchange for more border wall funding than is already on the table. 

Democrats have offered him wall funding multiple times, and been rebuffed each time because they also wanted to fix the underlying problems that a wall will not fix.  Trump refuses each time, because he doesn't care about fixing immigration, only about building an ineffective but deeply symbolic wall. 

But this is all a sideshow anyway.  The president's job is not to set the national budget.  Congress is supposed to do that, and they already passed a bipartisan budget compromise that funds border security and re-opens the government.  It passed unanimously in the Senate, which now refuses to allow it to advance.  I think it's hard to argue that democrats are being obstructionist in this case when every single democratic senator voted for the budget compromise including border security in the last Senate session, and the democratic House has passed multiple bills in to reopen the government and fund border security in the new session which the republican Senate refuses to consider despite having more than the required 2/3 support required to override Trump's veto.

At this point, I think the eventual solution is that republican senators beg Trump to relent because he is hurting their party's electoral chances.  He either relents, and looks bad, or he holds strong and forces republican senators to pass a budget over his veto, and he looks bad.

That is all basically true.  (I think I've seen some different numbers, but nothing more than ~10% different, so nothing that changes the thrust of these arguments.)  I would only add two things:

1) The best explanation I've seen for *why* the DACA protection deal failed is because the Wall is mostly a symbolic gesture.  (Say: after the first $1b, if we're being generous.)  So if you're a policy-oriented white nationalist -like, say: Stephen Miller- trading a huge substantive concession like DACA for a full wall is actually taking the country in the opposite direction than what you want.  Appeasing both Donald Trump and the pragmatic white nationalists requires two huge and separate concessions packages (massive wall funding and steep legal immigration cuts), and that puts the price outside of what Democrats would be willing to pay.  This is useful to point out now because it means Republicans are unlikely to rethink their earlier failure to take yes for an answer on the wall, so it will probably be something else that gets us out of this.

2) Even if Trump were willing to sign a <$1b unilateral concession (again: he's not, as the Pence debacle shows) then Democrats should still reject that while the government is closed.   Responsible leaders don't reward hostage taking with unilateral concessions because it incentivizes future rounds of hostage taking.  As long as Trump is offering nothing of value in exchange for his wall and holding the government hostage over it, Democrats would be irresponsible to give him any more than zero dollars for it.  To give him wall money would be to guarantee a repeat of this exercise the next time a funding bill comes due.  It's like a parent giving a screaming toddler ice cream: it doesn't make you a shitty parent because it fails to solve the immediate problem, it makes you a shitty parent because it sets up a dynamic that will keep repeating until you nut up and do what you should have done the first time.

[EnjoyIt]

Ignore DreamFire and EnjoyIt - they are just rationalizing Trump's tantrum and seem really afraid of dem liberals.

@TomTX
Why do you say that about me?  I think Trump is being pretty asinine on the subject and has rejected some decent options in the past.  I suspect he has some other ulterior motive I just can't figure out. I really don't think he actually wants to build a wall.  There must be something else on his agenda.

@sol,
I try not to get my news from cnn or from fox.  Both are very similar in propaganda and bullshit tossing.  But I have spoken to border patrol who have talked about and shown me images of their own drug seizures from those crossing over the border.  Drugs and people can easily cross, since there is no barrier to speak of.  Drug cartels use any and every means necessary to haul drugs into the US.  Personally i think they should all be legalized and all this trafficking would come to a complete stop.

As for agreements, please point me to a particular situation except for one that includes DACA where the dems said OK in putting up some form of barrier.  I am seriously curious.  I admit that I have not gone all out looking for it and willing to change my position on the subject if appropriate information is presented.  Please nothing from Huffington Post or CNN though.  Again, I use those news organizations not for data but to help me understand how the crazy left think just as I use the Drudge Report and Fox to see how the crazy right think.

[TomTX]

@TomTX
Why do you say that about me?  I think Trump is being pretty asinine on the subject and has rejected some decent options in the past.  I suspect he has some other ulterior motive I just can't figure out. I really don't think he actually wants to build a wall.  There must be something else on his agenda.

I must have mistaken you for someone else. My apologies.

[EnjoyIt]

I know that many of you will disagree on this, but I just don't think Trump is a stupid racist child who can't handle not getting what he wants.  I believe he is actually very intelligent and has been able to amass a large fortune through the manipulation of the media and of people. I suspect he is an expert at getting what he wants and does not care if he looks stupid doing so.  I don't know if this makes him a good president for everyone, but it does make him very effective despite all the media controversy and divisiveness it creates.  This wall controversy is likely a ruse to accomplish something else. If some sort of barrier comes with it, great for those who want it.  There is something else he is working on.

The voters of the US have been fed up with the politicians.  They are sick and tired of all the corruption and self serving politics we have been seeing for decades and they voted for a populist (I know Sol, only 46% voted for him vs 48% for Clinton.)  This is also the reason why Bernie Sanders was so popular as well.  I can't remember all the details but Hillary did some unscrupulous things to keep votes away from him.  Americans will continue to push populists along until our politicians straighten up their act and do something for the American people instead of the Corporations that keep funding their re-elections.  Our politicians are failing us and we need a changing of the guards.  Chuck, Nancy, Mitch, Lindsey, etc have all got to go.

[Michael in ABQ]

Based on what i formation I have accumulated it seams that some form of fencing/wall does hinder immigration and drug trafficking.

What information is that?  Because the big drug trial underway today, for example, explicitly mentions that drugs don't come though unfenced borders:  https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/12/us/drug-traffickers-el-chapo-trial-drugs-across-border/index.html

Maybe small time neighborhood dealers?  The cartels don't do it that way, because it's not cost effective.  Why would they drive for a hundred miles through the desert instead of using a major highway or port facility?

Coyote's (human smugglers) sometimes make the people they're taking across the border carry drugs as well as pay them in cash. If Border Patrol shows up the people can hide or abandon the drugs and claim that they're just immigrants. Usually it's bales of low-grade marijuana which are bulky and of relatively low value. I agree you probably don't have someone carrying 50lbs of cocaine on their person generally, the risk of being caught and losing that product is too high. A bale of Marijuana has a much lower value and is too bulky to hide enough inside a small compartment in a vehicle.


I'm in the New Mexico Army National Guard and have served with many people who are Border Patrol agents full time or work on the Counter Drug Surveillance (CDS) program https://www.nationalguard.mil/Portals/31/Resources/Fact%20Sheets/Counterdrug%20Fact%20Sheet%20(Dec.%202017).pdf . This is a federally funded program that exist in the National Guard in every state. You have Soldiers on temporary active duty that help out law enforcements (Border Patrol, DEA, local police, etc.) with surveillance for cunter-drug. This can include helicopters as well as ground-based surveillance. Most of their work is out in the desert, far from all of the parts around El Paso. I've seen the pictures and heard the stories straight from their mouth of seizing hundreds of pounds of drugs carried by people through the open desert.

[DreamFIRE]

In addition to the drugs, countless illegal aliens cross the border, leaving large amounts of trash behind, decorating rape trees, and worse.

The democrats voted for a border wall as part of The Secure Fence Act of 2006 which didn't include amnesty for any illegals.

https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061026-1.html
https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/2006-secure-fence-act-vs-trumps-border-wall
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/109-2006/h446

For cable news, msnbc is even worse than CNN for left wing bias.

[SnackDog]

I can't see the president has anything to lose by holding out for his wall indefinitely. He holds all the cards so no reason to negotiate. Congress will eventually be forced to flinch, but they will delay as long as possible and be dysfunctional about it.

[former player]

In addition to the drugs, countless illegal aliens cross the border, leaving large amounts of trash behind, decorating rape trees, and worse.

The democrats voted for a border wall as part of The Secure Fence Act of 2006 which didn't include amnesty for any illegals.

https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061026-1.html
https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/2006-secure-fence-act-vs-trumps-border-wall
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/109-2006/h446

For cable news, msnbc is even worse than CNN for left wing bias.

So if the dems voted the money for a border wall 12 years ago what has been happening since?  Have the most urgent parts been built?  Are there costed plans for parts of the wall that still need to be built?   Trump wants $5B, where are the plans which explain how that money is going to be spent and how it will improve security?  Have they been published?  Put to Congress?  Consulted upon?

Because without any of those things that $5B will either remain unspent or will go into a black hole of corruption, quite possibly one involving Trump cronies.

[msilenus]

So if the dems voted the money for a border wall 12 years ago what has been happening since?  Have the most urgent parts been built?  Are there costed plans for parts of the wall that still need to be built?   Trump wants $5B, where are the plans which explain how that money is going to be spent and how it will improve security?  Have they been published?  Put to Congress?  Consulted upon?

Because without any of those things that $5B will either remain unspent or will go into a black hole of corruption, quite possibly one involving Trump cronies.

This Cato piece answers a lot of your questions:
https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/why-wall-wont-work?fbclid=IwAR3q4SyNz7Gu7biDuKOVpxtHrTtwYalM2vW3k3YXwQa1rIWcAxJ7JQA2q5k

The short version is that fencing has been deployed along most of the border where it makes sense.  Where it isn't deployed yet there are good reasons why it hasn't, such as treaty and environmental concerns w.r.t. the Rio Grande river, legal issues surrounding eminent domain, et cetera. 

The political context of the fencing bill is also important to remember.  The conservative line at the time was "no immigration reform until we have border security."  There have since been a lot of concessions to conservatives that have dramatically increased border security, including that fencing, but also drones, and vast funding increases for patrols.  That's all been fairly successful, so most new undocumented immigrants today overstay visas, and the people fleeing from Central America are generally turning themselves in to seek asylum.  (We need judges to deal with the Central American migrant crisis.)

Which is to say: since we're past the point where the merits support more large-scale fencing efforts, we're also past the point where Democrats are going to vote for them without coupling such votes to serious immigration reforms.

[DreamFIRE]

The border wall will pay for itself.  The democrats thought it was a good idea until Trump became president.  See the links in my previous post.  Now, it's all about obstruction for the democrats while they sacrifice safety for American citizens.

EX-OBAMA OFFICIAL SUPPORTS TRUMP'S WALL - "I cannot think of a legitimate argument why anyone would not support the wall as part of a multi-layered border security issue." – Mark Morgan, former chief of U.S. Border Patrol under President Obama

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/apr/2/border-patrol-agents-back-trump-wall-survey-finds/

https://townhall.com/columnists/jeffcrouere/2018/12/01/build-the-border-wall-or-say-goodbye-to-america-n2536828

https://www.heritage.org/immigration/report/the-fiscal-cost-unlawful-immigrants-and-amnesty-the-us-taxpayer

https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/02/border-patrol-dhs-trump-wall-steel-fence/

https://dailycaller.com/2018/03/12/border-wall-pay-for-itself-cutting-welfare-illegal-immigrants/

https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/07/border-walls-work/

[the_fixer]

@msilenus

"2) Even if Trump were willing to sign a &lt;$1b unilateral concession (again: he's not, as the Pence debacle shows) then Democrats should still reject that while the government is closed.   Responsible leaders don't reward hostage taking with unilateral concessions because it incentivizes future rounds of hostage taking.  As long as Trump is offering nothing of value in exchange for his wall and holding the government hostage over it, Democrats would be irresponsible to give him any more than zero dollars for it.  To give him wall money would be to guarantee a repeat of this exercise the next time a funding bill comes due.  It's like a parent giving a screaming toddler ice cream: it doesn't make you a shitty parent because it fails to solve the immediate problem, it makes you a shitty parent because it sets up a dynamic that will keep repeating until you nut up and do what you should have done the first time"

-----------------

While I agree it is childish to keep the government shutdown to get what you want I would also like to point out that both parties have used this tactic. People act like this is the first time it has ever happened but 1995 - 1996 come to mind for example





Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[sol]

I can't see the president has anything to lose by holding out for his wall indefinitely. He holds all the cards so no reason to negotiate. Congress will eventually be forced to flinch, but they will delay as long as possible and be dysfunctional about it.

I'm not sure why you think the president has any cards at all.  He literally has no say on the federal budget, per the Constitution.  He can veto a budget that Congress passes, but since the budget compromise has already passed the House and then the Senate with a veto-proof majority, it doesn't matter what Trump wants.

I agree that Congress will flinch eventually, by sending Trump the budget compromise they have already worked out, or one very similar to it, and letting him veto it or not, and then overriding his veto if he does.  Right now McConnell is preventing that from happening, but that won't last forever.  He's not as keen to keep the US government closed for the next two years.

On a side note, how long do we think the government has to stay shut down before they start floating the idea of NOT giving back pay to all of those furloughed federal workers?  Six months?  Two years?  At some point, people are going to have to look for other jobs to feed their children, and after that I think republicans might suggest that they don't deserve back pay, or only deserve a few paychecks worth of back pay instead of their entire annual salaries paid retroactively all at once.

DreamFIRE, you should probably stop posting links from the daily caller.  You might as well post links to stormfront.org at this point, because nobody can possibly take you seriously if you're taking that stuff seriously.

[EnjoyIt]

DreamFIRE, you should probably stop posting links from the daily caller.  You might as well post links to stormfront.org at this point, because nobody can possibly take you seriously if you're taking that stuff seriously.

I agree.  We should just all agree to not posting links from any of the far left and far right propaganda/fake news publications:  Lets make a list:
Daily Caller
Drudge report
Fox
CNN
MSNBC
Huffington Post

Anything else?

[SnackDog]

McConnell has already lost serious face by developing a compromise budget and then having it vetoed and his face rubbed in it. By the man holding the veto card.  He will not put forth another budget unless he is sure it will be approved OR it has gotten so disastrously late in 2019 (or 2020) that regular voters are affected the shutdown and begin to grumble.  At the moment the grumbling is limited mostly to congress, the press and people missing their paycheck.

[sol]

We should just all agree to not posting links from any of the far left and far right propaganda/fake news publications:  Lets make a list:
Daily Caller
Drudge report
Fox
CNN
MSNBC
Huffington Post

Anything else?

If you think CNN belongs on that list, I'm afraid we're not going to find much agreement.  CNN has been a respected news network for 30 years.  The Daily Caller was started by a conservative activist tv personality for the sole purpose of spreading misinformation.  These things are not the same, in any way shape or form.

[EnjoyIt]

We should just all agree to not posting links from any of the far left and far right propaganda/fake news publications:  Lets make a list:
Daily Caller
Drudge report
Fox
CNN
MSNBC
Huffington Post

Anything else?

If you think CNN belongs on that list, I'm afraid we're not going to find much agreement.  CNN has been a respected news network for 30 years.  The Daily Caller was started by a conservative activist tv personality for the sole purpose of spreading misinformation.  These things are not the same, in any way shape or form.

CNN is a very left leaning news organization respected by the left.  It is respected by the left just as Fox is respected on the right.  Both are very biased and can not be used as a source of information.  If one gets all their news from CNN and like minded sources then ones views are very biased, limited and closed of from discussion.  Obviously closed minded very left leaning people will disagree with me.

[Roland of Gilead]

If you think CNN belongs on that list, I'm afraid we're not going to find much agreement.  CNN has been a respected news network for 30 years.  The Daily Caller was started by a conservative activist tv personality for the sole purpose of spreading misinformation.  These things are not the same, in any way shape or form.

Come on, CNN isn't perfect either.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNN_controversies

I remember this one:

"In October 2016, WikiLeaks published emails from John Podesta which showed CNN contributor Donna Brazile passing the questions for a CNN-sponsored debate to the Clinton campaign.[11] In the email, Brazile discussed her concern about Clinton's ability to field a question regarding the death penalty. The following day Clinton would receive the question about the death penalty, verbatim, from an audience member at the CNN-hosted Town Hall event.[12] According to a CNNMoney investigation, debate moderator Roland Martin of TV One "did not deny sharing information with Brazile".[13] CNN severed ties with Brazile on October 14, 2016.[14][15]"

[sol]

Come on, CNN isn't perfect either.

I didn't say perfect.  I said it wasn't created solely for partisan purposes.  By a well known ideologue with a clearly articulated agenda of undermining open discourse and honest reporting of events, I might add.

I fear America is lost.

[DreamFIRE]

CNN is a very left leaning news organization respected by the left.  It is respected by the left just as Fox is respected on the right.  Both are very biased and can not be used as a source of information.  If one gets all their news from CNN and like minded sources then ones views are very biased, limited and closed of from discussion.  Obviously closed minded very left leaning people will disagree with me.

We should just all agree to not posting links from any of the far left and far right propaganda/fake news publications:  Lets make a list:
Daily Caller
Drudge report
Fox
CNN
MSNBC
Huffington Post

Anything else?

If you think CNN belongs on that list, I'm afraid we're not going to find much agreement.  CNN has been a respected news network for 30 years.  The Daily Caller was started by a conservative

CNN has as much fake news as Sol posts.  I mostly avoid it, but there's some extremely left bias on CNN spreading misinformation.  I saw Chris Cuomo on there a couple times lately and felt like punching that liberal in the face.  Too many Americans are getting brainwashed by that BS.  But Sol has to get his talking points somewhere.

[seattlecyclone]

DreamFIRE, you should probably stop posting links from the daily caller.  You might as well post links to stormfront.org at this point, because nobody can possibly take you seriously if you're taking that stuff seriously.

I agree.  We should just all agree to not posting links from any of the far left and far right propaganda/fake news publications:  Lets make a list:
Daily Caller
Drudge report
Fox
CNN
MSNBC
Huffington Post

Anything else?

Someone already took a stab at this, and I think they did a pretty good job. The organizations in the red and orange rectangles are sources I generally take with a huge grain of salt regardless of what side of the spectrum they sit on.

[DreamFIRE]

Fox news has been shown to be the most balanced based on independent studies:

[Paul der Krake]

Fox news has been shown to be the most balanced based on independent studies:

unsubscribe

[seattlecyclone]

So...Fox News spends almost half of its time saying great things about the Republicans and the other half saying derogatory things about the Democrats, immigrants, Muslims, etc? Very balanced indeed!

[DreamFIRE]

Fox news has been shown to be the most balanced based on independent studies:

unsubscribe

You have been unsubscribed.  Simply do not open this thread again, and you will never see this message.

[Roland of Gilead]

Saying Fox news is balanced reporting is hilarious.

I am rather glad I skew Libertarian.  I think you are all crazy.

"Libertarianism in the United States has been described as conservative on economic issues and liberal on personal freedom[28] (for common meanings of conservative and liberal in the United States) and it is also often associated with a foreign policy of non-interventionism."

[shuffler]

Fox news has been shown to be the most balanced based on independent studies:

SeattleCyclone posted a cited chart with a believable distribution.

You posted an unsourced chart that pertains to the "tone" of news reports.
You claimed that Fox News is the most "balanced", by which I believe you intend to imply it is the most "fair", but that's not at all what your unsourced chart shows.

You're not helping your own credibility.

[DreamFIRE]

Fox news has been shown to be the most balanced based on independent studies:

You claimed that Fox News is the most "balanced"

Actually, I didn't claim that.  A Harvard Study showed that.  I don't really care about YOUR opinion or other leftists' opinions.  Feel free to consume your fake news from msNBC.

[FrugalToque]

This went way off topic and is no longer useful, as we're clearly trolling at this point.

Locking.