![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
[scooter]
Footballguy
In 2006, lots of Democrats supported the Secure Fence Act.
In 2019, lots of Republicans think that "Secure" is a synonym for "Build", and that "Fence" is a synonym for "Wall".
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Undocumented Immigrant Thread (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
In 2019, lots of Republicans think that "Secure" is a synonym for "Build", and that "Fence" is a synonym for "Wall".
The Future Champs
Footballguy
Look, I hate to sound like that "Get off my lawn" old codger, but most of the new beers are crap aimed at millennials who want low carbs or fruit or ice or some other abomination in their beer.DAMN YOU, TRUMP. DAMN YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
Beer And Wine Makers Are Being Forced To Put New Drinks On Hold Because Of The Government Shutdown
I wouldn't offer this if I were the Dems as they look like they are going to win. GOP may be forced to give 2 and 3 without 1 just for goodwill.
But if Dem did make that offer, I would write in protections for Mueller just to see Trump go nuts.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Hilts
Footballguy
I agree with your criticisms here. Anyone supporting abuse of immigrants along the border is deplorable in every sense of the word.
Snorkelson
Footballguy
Who could have guessed, the trump administration wasn’t prepared or anticipate problems with shutdown. Funding for snap will run out if the shutdown lasts through February- that money gets spent in stores who won’t be seeing that money. Tax returns could be delayed, meaning more money won’t be finding its way into the economy the way it usually would.
Spineless republicans have been taking Russian money from the NRA and are all in on backing trump at the detriment of the American people.
Spineless republicans have been taking Russian money from the NRA and are all in on backing trump at the detriment of the American people.
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
Trump’s Wall, Trump’s Shutdown and Trump’s Side of the story
By Peter Baker and Maggie Haberman
Jan. 4, 2019
WASHINGTON — At first, he vowed to “take the mantle” for closing part of the federal government. Then he blamed Democrats, saying they “now own the shutdown.” By Friday, President Trump was back to owning it again. “I’m very proud of doing what I’m doing,” he declared.
Two weeks into the showdown over a border wall, Mr. Trump is now crafting his own narrative of the confrontation that has come to consume his presidency. Rather than a failure of negotiation, the shutdown has become a test of political virility, one in which he insists he is receiving surreptitious support from unlikely quarters.
Not only are national security hawks cheering him on to defend a porous southern border, but so too are former presidents who he says have secretly confessed to him that they should have done what he is doing. Not only do federal employees accept being furloughed or forced to work without wages, they have assured him that they would give up paychecks so that he can stand strong.
Never mind how implausible such assertions might seem. The details do not matter to Mr. Trump as much as dominating the debate. After an oddly quiescent holiday season in which he complained via Twitter about being left at home alone — “poor me” — he has taken the public stage this week clearly intent on framing the conflict on his own terms.
[President Trump warned that he was considering declaring a national emergency to build the border wall.]
People close to the president described him as emboldened since members of Congress returned to Washington after the break, giving him not only a clear target to swing at but helping him focus on a fight that he is convinced is a political winner. One aide said Mr. Trump believes he has gained the upper hand in the public battle.
Although surveys at first showed more Americans blaming him for the shutdown than Democrats, later polling showed the fault more evenly split. And the voters he cares most about, his core conservative supporters, are more enthusiastic than the public at large. He has told people that “my people” love the fight, and that he believes he is winning.
In the past three days, Mr. Trump has appeared in public three times to get his version of the story out while Democrats celebrated their takeover of the House. At a lengthy cabinet meeting on Wednesday, an appearance with border patrol union leaders on Thursday and a news conference with Republican congressional leaders in the Rose Garden on Friday, he engaged in quintessentially Trumpian stream of conscious discussions that ranged widely and unpredictably.
At one point, he argued that the Soviet Union was right to invade Afghanistan in 1979 to stop terrorists, a revisionist version that provoked a strong reaction in Kabul and earned a sharp rebuke from the often supportive editorial page of The Wall Street Journal, which said, “We cannot recall a more absurd misstatement of history by an American President.”
At another point, Mr. Trump mocked India for doing no more in Afghanistan than building a library, which generated headlines in New Delhi about the “jab” at its prime minister, not to mention more head scratching because, according to Indian news media, the country has not built a library in Afghanistan in many years.
He repeatedly claimed that the new trade agreement he has negotiated with Mexico and Canada means that Mexico really is paying for the wall, even though the pact has yet to be approved by Congress and has no direct connection to border security. He has made misleading claims about how many terrorists might be coming across the border.
Mr. Trump’s version of events differed even from the other people in the room at Friday’s meeting at the White House. When Democratic congressional leaders emerged after two hours, they described a “contentious” session with no meaningful progress as the president threatened to keep the government closed for “months or even years.” When Mr. Trump emerged shortly afterward, he described a “very, very productive meeting” and predicted the standoff could be “fixed very quickly.”
Two people briefed on the meeting said that White House officials viewed the conversation as the first civil discussion that had taken place between the two sides, and it left some of Mr. Trump’s aides hopeful. Indeed, Mr. Trump made a point of publicly saying nothing but relatively positive things about the Democrats on Friday.
Optimistic that a deal really is within reach, the president said he would have Vice President Mike Pence; Kirstjen Nielsen, the homeland security secretary; and Jared Kushner, his son-in-law and senior adviser, meet with Democrats over the weekend.
But there were questions about his own side of the aisle. Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, unlike other congressional Republican leaders, was not present for the Rose Garden news conference. “He’s running the Senate,” Mr. Trump explained, even though the Senate had adjourned hours earlier and Mr. McConnell’s spokesman said the senator did not know about the news conference.
The president nonetheless was feeling energized by support he said he had received for the fight — including the very federal employees who are not being paid as a result of the partial shutdown.
“A lot of people that you think are upset — and certainly they’re not thrilled — but they say, ‘Sir, do the right thing, we need border security,’” Mr. Trump said. “And these are people that won’t be getting paid.”
As for his predecessors, he said, “This should have been done by all of the presidents that preceded me, and they all know it. Some of them have told me that we should have done it.”
By all public accounts, Mr. Trump had not spoken with his living predecessors since his inauguration until former President George Bush died last month. Mr. Trump called Mr. Bush’s son, former President George W. Bush, to offer condolences, but the subject of the wall did not come up, according to Mr. Bush’s office. A few days later, at the elder Mr. Bush’s funeral, Mr. Trump encountered his predecessors for the first time since taking office, but he sat quietly without talking with them during the service.
The younger Mr. Bush built miles of wall and fencing along the Mexico line while he was president, but said it could not cover the entire border and insisted that enforcement should be coupled with an overhaul of immigration law to permit many people in the country illegally to stay. Former President Barack Obama has repeatedly criticized Mr. Trump’s proposed wall, and former President Jimmy Carter has said technological improvements would be more effective at protecting the border.
The White House did not say afterward which presidents Mr. Trump was referring to, but a senior administration official said he was probably referring to public comments his predecessors have made about the need for border security, not necessarily for a wall specifically.
As he careened this week from subject to subject and assertion to assertion, an energized Mr. Trump seemed to be enjoying himself. He went on for more than an hour and a half on Wednesday and another hour on Friday.
“Should we keep this going or not, folks?” he asked reporters at one point before noticing that it was a cold January day in the Rose Garden.
“Should we keep this going a little bit longer?” he asked again. “Let me know when you get tired.”
One thing Mr. Trump was not was tired.
Jan. 4, 2019
WASHINGTON — At first, he vowed to “take the mantle” for closing part of the federal government. Then he blamed Democrats, saying they “now own the shutdown.” By Friday, President Trump was back to owning it again. “I’m very proud of doing what I’m doing,” he declared.
Two weeks into the showdown over a border wall, Mr. Trump is now crafting his own narrative of the confrontation that has come to consume his presidency. Rather than a failure of negotiation, the shutdown has become a test of political virility, one in which he insists he is receiving surreptitious support from unlikely quarters.
Not only are national security hawks cheering him on to defend a porous southern border, but so too are former presidents who he says have secretly confessed to him that they should have done what he is doing. Not only do federal employees accept being furloughed or forced to work without wages, they have assured him that they would give up paychecks so that he can stand strong.
Never mind how implausible such assertions might seem. The details do not matter to Mr. Trump as much as dominating the debate. After an oddly quiescent holiday season in which he complained via Twitter about being left at home alone — “poor me” — he has taken the public stage this week clearly intent on framing the conflict on his own terms.
[President Trump warned that he was considering declaring a national emergency to build the border wall.]
People close to the president described him as emboldened since members of Congress returned to Washington after the break, giving him not only a clear target to swing at but helping him focus on a fight that he is convinced is a political winner. One aide said Mr. Trump believes he has gained the upper hand in the public battle.
Although surveys at first showed more Americans blaming him for the shutdown than Democrats, later polling showed the fault more evenly split. And the voters he cares most about, his core conservative supporters, are more enthusiastic than the public at large. He has told people that “my people” love the fight, and that he believes he is winning.
In the past three days, Mr. Trump has appeared in public three times to get his version of the story out while Democrats celebrated their takeover of the House. At a lengthy cabinet meeting on Wednesday, an appearance with border patrol union leaders on Thursday and a news conference with Republican congressional leaders in the Rose Garden on Friday, he engaged in quintessentially Trumpian stream of conscious discussions that ranged widely and unpredictably.
At one point, he argued that the Soviet Union was right to invade Afghanistan in 1979 to stop terrorists, a revisionist version that provoked a strong reaction in Kabul and earned a sharp rebuke from the often supportive editorial page of The Wall Street Journal, which said, “We cannot recall a more absurd misstatement of history by an American President.”
At another point, Mr. Trump mocked India for doing no more in Afghanistan than building a library, which generated headlines in New Delhi about the “jab” at its prime minister, not to mention more head scratching because, according to Indian news media, the country has not built a library in Afghanistan in many years.
He repeatedly claimed that the new trade agreement he has negotiated with Mexico and Canada means that Mexico really is paying for the wall, even though the pact has yet to be approved by Congress and has no direct connection to border security. He has made misleading claims about how many terrorists might be coming across the border.
Mr. Trump’s version of events differed even from the other people in the room at Friday’s meeting at the White House. When Democratic congressional leaders emerged after two hours, they described a “contentious” session with no meaningful progress as the president threatened to keep the government closed for “months or even years.” When Mr. Trump emerged shortly afterward, he described a “very, very productive meeting” and predicted the standoff could be “fixed very quickly.”
Two people briefed on the meeting said that White House officials viewed the conversation as the first civil discussion that had taken place between the two sides, and it left some of Mr. Trump’s aides hopeful. Indeed, Mr. Trump made a point of publicly saying nothing but relatively positive things about the Democrats on Friday.
Optimistic that a deal really is within reach, the president said he would have Vice President Mike Pence; Kirstjen Nielsen, the homeland security secretary; and Jared Kushner, his son-in-law and senior adviser, meet with Democrats over the weekend.
But there were questions about his own side of the aisle. Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, unlike other congressional Republican leaders, was not present for the Rose Garden news conference. “He’s running the Senate,” Mr. Trump explained, even though the Senate had adjourned hours earlier and Mr. McConnell’s spokesman said the senator did not know about the news conference.
The president nonetheless was feeling energized by support he said he had received for the fight — including the very federal employees who are not being paid as a result of the partial shutdown.
“A lot of people that you think are upset — and certainly they’re not thrilled — but they say, ‘Sir, do the right thing, we need border security,’” Mr. Trump said. “And these are people that won’t be getting paid.”
As for his predecessors, he said, “This should have been done by all of the presidents that preceded me, and they all know it. Some of them have told me that we should have done it.”
By all public accounts, Mr. Trump had not spoken with his living predecessors since his inauguration until former President George Bush died last month. Mr. Trump called Mr. Bush’s son, former President George W. Bush, to offer condolences, but the subject of the wall did not come up, according to Mr. Bush’s office. A few days later, at the elder Mr. Bush’s funeral, Mr. Trump encountered his predecessors for the first time since taking office, but he sat quietly without talking with them during the service.
The younger Mr. Bush built miles of wall and fencing along the Mexico line while he was president, but said it could not cover the entire border and insisted that enforcement should be coupled with an overhaul of immigration law to permit many people in the country illegally to stay. Former President Barack Obama has repeatedly criticized Mr. Trump’s proposed wall, and former President Jimmy Carter has said technological improvements would be more effective at protecting the border.
The White House did not say afterward which presidents Mr. Trump was referring to, but a senior administration official said he was probably referring to public comments his predecessors have made about the need for border security, not necessarily for a wall specifically.
As he careened this week from subject to subject and assertion to assertion, an energized Mr. Trump seemed to be enjoying himself. He went on for more than an hour and a half on Wednesday and another hour on Friday.
“Should we keep this going or not, folks?” he asked reporters at one point before noticing that it was a cold January day in the Rose Garden.
“Should we keep this going a little bit longer?” he asked again. “Let me know when you get tired.”
One thing Mr. Trump was not was tired.
Sheriff Bart
Footballguy
I just read comments on two other boards that it's the employees fault for not saving enough money to ride this out. That sounds so familiar.
ClownCausedChaos2
Footballguy
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
I just said to myself the same thing. Then i read your post. This reply will take me 6 pages ahead. Hope its enough.
GoBirds
Footballguy
To fit their narrative.
I like your glass half full approach...and if they really don’t like it encourage their Democrats to fund for border security.
mrip541
Footballguy
I saw a bit about a brewery that releases a new beer every 2 weeks, and how the shutdown effectively kills their business model. It definitely triggered a get off my lawn moment.
the moops
Footballguy
KCitons
Footballguy
Dedfin
Footballguy
Are you annoyed at choice, in general? Or are you annoyed that breweries aren't making beer you like?
Dedfin
Footballguy
KCitons
Footballguy
I thought you had me on ignore? You continue to tell people to stop quoting me so you don't have to see my posts. Yet, here you are quoting me? You're an odd dude.
I may go. If I find a board that isn't lopsided and respects opinions of all posters. I suspect you will suggest some far right message board that is the exact opposite of what I am looking for.
Hawkeye21
Footballguy
Hawkeye21
Footballguy
squistion
Footballguy
Daily Beast reports:
Along with saying the word "####" at least 3 times throughout the White House meeting, Trump bizarrely stated that he didn't want to call the government shutdown a "shutdown." He wanted to call it a "strike,"
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-referred-to-shutdown-as-strike-in-profanity-laced-meeting-with-democratic-leaders?via=twitter_page
KCitons
Footballguy
Hawkeye21
Footballguy
I never said I wanted you to. There needs to be a differing of opinions in a forum otherwise it's pretty pointless. My point was that it's as simple as doing a google search to find another forum that matches your opinions. If you want to join one, go ahead and do it. Go follow RatedRed on Facebook.
apalmer
Footballguy
Change "government worker" to "welfare recipient" in that statement and tell me how you'd feel about it.
GoBirds
Footballguy
Isn’t it funny how childish they act regarding the ignore function and people quoting those they supposedly ignored but didn’t really as they need to troll?
Totally get what you are saying, would be interested to hear if you do find a board like you mention. The one sided echo isn’t interesting or productive in any way.
Mile High
Footballguy
They shouldn't have went on a strike because they want a wall then, if they didn't have enough money to ride this out
Dedfin
Footballguy
Ok KCitons, https://forum.bodybuilding.com/forumdisplay.php?f=19
Sorry to anyone here to enjoys the misc. Maybe he can improve himself there.
Sorry to anyone here to enjoys the misc. Maybe he can improve himself there.
KCitons
Footballguy
Okay:
Is there an offset to this? Do we assume that every welfare recipient is sitting at home doing nothing? Perhaps they are spending more time with their families. Maybe they are volunteering. Money may be spent at shops or restaurants near their homes.
Welfare recipients and government workers are two different things? (I was told we can't make comparisons like this)
What was your point?
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
This is why I'm not to worried about the shutdown despite the impact it's having on us directly.
If you know what you're doing, plan well, and get ahead of things, the government can work around a shutdown for an extended period before TSHTF. But if you're Trumps band of morons you have no idea how government works and the TSHTF moment will come much much sooner.
Pelosi and Schumer can see what's ahead much more clearly than Trump and are doing exactly what they should be doing: when your enemy is drowning, throw them an anchor.
KCitons
Footballguy
Lutherman2112
Footballguy
It seems you are the only one that gleaned that implication from JNB's post.
Let's revisit the comment, which I consider an attempt at humor (I laughed):
JuniorNB used absurdity, hockey boards/glass as a border wall and US agents checking illegal immigrants into to boards as if it all of this is a game. JNB undermined convention with absurdity and earn a chuckle from me.
Furthermore, JNB used absurdity again to suggest that enough Americans would view the "action" along the border boards to pay for the boards.
Lighten up a little and laugh.
jamny
Footballguy
It seems that a couple of other posters agreed with the implication I took from the post and the OP didn't come back to refute my assumption. Sorry if I don't find being considered someone who would approve of that to be funny. Learn to read between the lines a little.
Last edited by a moderator:
jamny
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I have to say it's a good question what order to put 1. threats to national security, 2. loss of government services, 3. complete failure of sworn duty to run government and uphold the Constitution, and 4. causing economic hardship to federal employees.
- I think about it like if it happened to me that I didn't receive a payment/paycheck, and I had enough money to get by (which I do), how would I feel? I'd be pretty pissed that's how I'd feel. If your employer, customer or client didn't pay you? You'd be angry as hell man, or I hope you would be. It's just plain wrong. If you didn't have the money to get by, you' be angry and you'd be desperate. I can see x people have enough and have been wronged, and y people don't have enough and are desperate and have been wronged. Does it really matter if it's half a million in Y or 10 million? It's an awful thing to do to one person for no reason.
I also can't imagine of some thinking 'vacation'. I don't know who those people are, I can't imagine that mindset. I had my whole career and existence flash before me during Katrina, I got off my ### Second 1 and I worked like hell to save my career, people in the rest of the US/world didn't give a #### that I couldn't plug in my computer.
But what is really happening are the people who are being asked to show up without pay. Folks like the TSA and the air traffic controllers. That affects all 4 of the things I mentioned above. They're suffering and they provide key services and they just may not show the hell up.
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
[icon]
Insoxicated
Shutdowns are widely a result of dissent between presidency and house or senate (more often the former). There have been slightly more shutdowns during Republican presidencies with a Democratic house.
Fun fact:
4 of the Government Shutdowns (about 1/3 of all shutdowns) were when Democrats held the Presidency, House, AND senate.
How does that even happen when you have control of the whole show and STILL have to shut the machine down?
Last edited by a moderator:
jamny
Footballguy
The worst part is that none of this will be worth it. They'll settle on something like $1.5 billion, call it border security and both sides will claim victory. Meanwhile, the only ones to suffer are those currently being used as pawns. Then we'll do it all over again in the near future.
Last edited by a moderator:
KCitons
Footballguy
We know the government shutdown will end at some point. A majority of those workers will receive back pay. (history has shown that).
I would hope that the same amount of concern that is shown for people that are struggling now, is shown for those that have no job, or no home, after this shutdown has passed. Otherwise, this is just anger due to agenda.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Just on the second point, that's exactly a good part of what domestic government does these days.
KCitons
Footballguy
[icon]
Insoxicated
Correct, both sides are stocked with ####### imbeciles while the rest of America are dragged along for the ride. My guess is we see at LEAST one or two shutdowns per presidential term going forward. This brinksmanship is going nowhere but downhill.
But, HEY let’s slap a bandaid on it and kick the can down the road!
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
It's better that they do it than not do it at all, wouldn't you agree? - I'll also add just from a conservative POV the American people have already paid for these services. Americans have been taxed, they have paid, and right now they are getting ripped off, so add that to the list.
KCitons
Footballguy
I'm on the fence about this. I'm not so sure that the same funding, given to the right non-profit, wouldn't do more for the cause than our government does.
dgreen
Footballguy
Franknbeans
Footballguy
Agreed. Maybe if they scaled back on all the wars, there would be adequate resources to address these problems.
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
L
One of the best things we can do as parents is to teach children delayed gratification. A “no” can be an awesome teaching moment. Saying no to keep them from harm, or having them contribute or pat for the thing they want, leads to great life lessons that serve them well into adulthood.
The ability to delay gratification leads to a host of other positive outcomes, including academic success, physical health, psychological health, and social competence. A person's ability to delay gratification relates to other similar skills such as patience, impulse control, self-control and willpower, all of which are involved in self-regulation. Broadly, self-regulation encompasses a person's capacity to adapt the self as necessary to meet demands of the environment.
If one grows up having never learned to delay gratification, that person has an immature & irresponsible world view. Which is probably as good of an explain as any why DJT seems to often behave like a five year old. In many ways, that’s where his emotional development stopped.
I’m sure he had many, like any of us. It’s just that his usually involved models, coke, concrete, peeling off 20s/50s/100s for resolution.
One of the best things we can do as parents is to teach children delayed gratification. A “no” can be an awesome teaching moment. Saying no to keep them from harm, or having them contribute or pat for the thing they want, leads to great life lessons that serve them well into adulthood.
The ability to delay gratification leads to a host of other positive outcomes, including academic success, physical health, psychological health, and social competence. A person's ability to delay gratification relates to other similar skills such as patience, impulse control, self-control and willpower, all of which are involved in self-regulation. Broadly, self-regulation encompasses a person's capacity to adapt the self as necessary to meet demands of the environment.
If one grows up having never learned to delay gratification, that person has an immature & irresponsible world view. Which is probably as good of an explain as any why DJT seems to often behave like a five year old. In many ways, that’s where his emotional development stopped.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
And I have been in the past too depending on the subject, but we've already given the money, our money. - Imagine if instead of the government you tithed out 30% of your income to a charity and you show up to see how your funds were being used and it turns out that the doors were closed, you're told that the board couldn't reach agreement on basic decisions. I'd have to think you'd be pretty aggravated.
KCitons
Footballguy
The Z Machine
Footballguy
KCitons
Footballguy
Similar threads
