Do you want to see the utter bankruptcy of the American right?

It's surprising that you, of all people, wouldn't recognize a hostage situation when you see it. Trump should not be taught that his thuggery works.

 

Pelosi has nothing to do with this? That's right when the Republicans have the house and don't do as the dims say then it is the houses fall. When the sims have the house then the Senate and president are to blame.

 

That can only be due to your choice of "news" and it shielding you from the facts. I have seen several people interviewed on TV who told their stories of hardships, like the woman who could not get diabetes medication.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...706d5a-1b3a-11e9-8813-cb9dec761e73_story.html

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/19/6869...ederal-workers-cant-afford-to-miss-a-paycheck

Yeah that was mine. I added that and you're right; IF backpay is paid in the end, the money will then be available for delinquent payments to be caught up. But the delinquency still affects the credit rating.

 

No, that's what Trump wants. Don't put his inhumanity on me!

 

I don't see it like you do, Kode. The way I see it is that Trump is using leverage that he possesses under our Constitution. As I said, he does not have to sign a bill.

And, if he were to cave in and just sign the CR with no wall funding, he would never get it. You know it. I know it. So no, I have not been calling on Trump and McConnell to drop the demands for a wall and separate it from other matters. I support the idea of better border security.

Let me ask you a hypothetical. Let's say all the party affiliations were the opposite. And let's say the majority Republicans in the House cut out funding for Planned Parenthood in a CR. With the Democrats controlling the Senate and the Presidency, would you support the Democratic president refusing to sign the bill until that funding was restored? Or would you say the President should just sign it to avoid a partial government shutdown? Keep in mind that if he doesn't hold out now for that funding, he or she will never get it.

You see, I think what's at issue (border security) is what is defining the battle lines, not that someone is being a thug, because I can easily see where the situation could be reversed. I think that if the situation was reversed, like the hypothetical above, Democrats would be cheering the President for his or her courage and resolve.

I think Nan and Chuckie ought to just give him the funding, get some other things they value, everybody compromises, and the federal workers go back to work. I think this is what we pay Congress to do, and right now, Congress is letting us all down. (Not surprising)

I would really like you to think about the hypothetical and give me an honest, straight answer.

Seth

 

His leverage is 1) unrelated to the bill to open government, and 2) he refuses to negotiate on that one point. A majority of Americans oppose him on the wall, and so the Democrats also are opposing him on it. And they can't reward threats by complying with them.

A majority of voters oppose a wall. And illegal immigration at the border is at a 17-year low. ...
"The House last week approved $1.6 billion in spending for President Trump’s proposed wall along the Mexican border, but with illegal immigration at the Mexican border at a 17-year low, most voters don’t want it anymore.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 37% of Likely U.S. Voters believe the United States should build a wall along the Mexican border to help stop illegal immigration."
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...n/july_2017/most_voters_say_no_to_border_wall

First, though I oppose spending for a wall that is unnecessary and will have limited benefit, the issue is his refusal to compromise and drop this unrelated club... er... I mean demand. But to answer your question, most certainly I would support a Democrat and presidential refusal to sign such a bill because a HUGE majority of Americans want some form of abortion to be legal, and Planned Parenthood has not been shown to have done anything illegal. In this case, a majority of Americans do not want a wall. So in both cases the Democrats are on the side of the majority of Americans.

-As I just said.

I think I did. At least I tried to.

 

I'm not saying that is is not an inconvenience without any consequence; I'm saying that making it a national catastrophe in the news is BS..... Far out of proportion in order to turn it to another political hack job. Surely, some of those in the media can rise above that. Waiting to see it....

 

Kode, the vast majority of Americans want border security.

And if the Democrats will approve $1.6 billion for a wall or barriers of some sort, then they too must recognize the necessity for barriers. So we're not talking about "our image" or that a wall is "immoral", are we? Were talking about the difference of about $4 billion out of a 3-4 trillion dollar budget.

So if both sides are in favor of barriers, let's just give the President what he needs to sign the bill, and let's make some other compromise regarding immigration, like the Dreamers, for example, and open up government.

This is how our government is supposed to work.

 

Of course. Do you think a wall is the only way? Most Americans don't.

Well, it's a moot point now.

 

I know you can't be expected to remember everything everyone says, but I have said many times that I think a barrier is a part of the solution, not the whole solution.

And it's not a moot point now. With the government re-opening for 20 days, Congress has got to work together and make some compromises, just like I said.