45
   

Turning The Ballot Box Against Republicans

 
 
hightor
 
  4  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2019 03:05 pm
@coldjoint,
A typical example of the derivative drivel you folks try to pass off as political analysis.

First, it's a few months old and has lost any relevance:
Quote:
The Democratic Party is in disarray, struggling to find banner issues to garner votes in midterm elections.

Yes, tell us more.

Then he tries this one:
Quote:
Their move [abolish ICE] was checkmated by Republicans when Democrats were offered the chance to vote on the issue.

Actually it was the Dems who called the majority party's bluff — they all planned to vote to save ICE and thereby thwart the GOP's plan to use the vote against them.

Going way back he brings up the subject of Pelosi meeting with Assad in 2007, pointing to the appalling number of Syrian deaths in the conflict:
Quote:
There was no reason for Pelosi to undertake that visit other than to poke a finger in the eye of President Bush, interfering with his foreign policy efforts to isolate Assad.

But however bad Assad is, under Trump it's definitely worth allowing him back into political legitimacy and letting him and Putin to finish off any remaining pockets of resistance, people who we once supported.

This is really pathetic:
Quote:
Pelosi also has no problem conveniently playing the religion card to promote her party’s ideology.

Except that the accompanying examples show nothing of the kind:
Quote:
As a religious Pence revealed last year he never dines alone with another woman without his wife present, Pelosi – playing to the obviously media-friendly crowd – posed the question, “”Do you think Mike Pence is allowed to dine alone with a man in drag?”

It's a fair question. I've known a good number of religious believers and not one has ever been so insecure that he couldn't trust himself to dine alone with a woman!

Then, after suggesting Pelosi has Alzheimer's he makes this astute observation:
Quote:
Pelosi’s performance – or non-performance – has reached a point no longer is ignored by her own party members. With midterm elections approaching, they believe she is hurting their chances to take over the House. Some 42 Democratic Party House nominees have opted to reject the polarizing leader’s endorsement.

Yeah, I guess she's washed up.

Really, coldjoint, we know you want to spam this thread with Trump-inspired misinformation but can't you even find articles which, if not current, are at least not contradicted by subsequent events? Reading this junk is a waste of our time. And posting it is a waste of yours.
Region Philbis
 
  4  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2019 05:22 pm

https://i.imgur.com/IIMbrEm.jpg
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2019 05:44 pm
@Region Philbis,
How did Obama and Chuck Schumer change their minds about a wall, and why? Failing policies? White guilt? You bet.
neptuneblue
 
  2  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2019 06:09 pm
@coldjoint,
Secure Fence Act of 2006
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Long title An Act To establish operational control over the international land and maritime borders of the United States.
Enacted by the 109th United States Congress
Citations
Public law Pub.L. 109–367
Statutes at Large 120 Stat. 2638–2640
Codification
Acts amended Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996
U.S.C. sections amended 8 U.S.C. § 1103, 14 U.S.C. § 637
Legislative history
Introduced in the House as H.R. 6061 by Peter T. King (R-NY) on September 13, 2006
Committee consideration by House Homeland Security
Passed the House on September 14, 2006 (283–138, 1 Present)
Passed the Senate on September 29, 2006 (80–19)
Signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 26, 2006

President George W. Bush signing the Secure Fence Act of 2006.

The US-Mexico border fence near El Paso, Texas. The Secure Fence Act of 2006 authorizes the construction of 700 additional miles (1,100 km) of the double chain link and barbed wire fences with light and infrared camera poles.

On October 26, 2006, U.S. President George W. Bush signed the Secure Fence Act of 2006 (Pub.L. 109–367) into law stating, "This bill will help protect the American people. This bill will make our borders more secure. It is an important step toward immigration reform."[1]

The bill was introduced on September 13, 2006 by Congressman Peter T. King, Republican of New York. In the House of Representatives, the Fence Act passed 283–138 on September 14, 2006.[2] On September 29, 2006, the Fence Act passed in the Senate 80–19.

Background
The fencing built under the 2006 act was not the first border fencing in the United States. The U.S. Border Patrol first began to erect physical barriers in its San Diego sector in 1990.[3] Fourteen miles of fencing were erected along the border of San Diego, California and Tijuana, Mexico.[4][5]

Provisions
In 2006, at the time it was passed, George W. Bush's White House touted the fence as "an important step toward immigration reform."[1] The White House Office of the Press Secretary stated that the Act "Authorizes the construction of hundreds of miles of additional fencing along our Southern border; Authorizes more vehicle barriers, checkpoints, and lighting to help prevent people from entering our country illegally; Authorizes the Department of Homeland Security to increase the use of advanced technology like cameras, satellites, and unmanned aerial vehicles to reinforce our infrastructure at the border."[1]

2007 amendment
The original 2006 act provided for "at least two layers of reinforced fencing" to be built. However, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) successfully argued to Congress "that different border terrains required different types of fencing, that a one-size-fits-all approach across the entire border didn't make sense."[6] An amendment introduced by Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican of Texas, was passed, amending the law to read: "nothing in this paragraph shall require the Secretary of Homeland Security to install fencing, physical barriers, roads, lighting, cameras, and sensors in a particular location along an international border of the United States, if the Secretary determines that the use or placement of such resources is not the most appropriate means to achieve and maintain operational control over the international border at such location."[6]

Erection of the fence
By April 2009, DHS had erected about 613 miles (985 km) of new pedestrian fencing and vehicle barriers along the southwest border from California to Texas.[7] Delays frustrated some, such as Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, who in 2010 introduced legislation seeking to require completion of the 700-mile-long, double-layered fence. (DHS had since 2007 begun "to shift its focus to erecting a 'virtual fence' along the 2,000-mile border, using sensors, cameras and other high-tech equipment to prevent illegal crossings."). DeMint's legislation was defeated in a 52–45 Senate vote in 2010.[8]

By May 2011, DHS reported completing 649 miles of fencing (99.5% of the 652 miles planned). The barrier was made up of 299 miles of vehicle barriers and 350 miles of pedestrian fence.[6] The fencing includes a steel fence (varying in height between 18 and 26 feet) that divides the border towns of Nogales, Arizona in the U.S. and Nogales, Sonora in Mexico.[9] A 2016 report by the Government Accountability Office confirmed that the government had completed the fence by 2015.[10] A 2017 GAO report noted: "In addition to the 654 miles of primary fencing, CBP has also deployed additional layers of pedestrian fencing behind the primary border fencing, including 37 miles of secondary fencing and 14 miles of tertiary fencing."[11]

Cost
Although the 2006 law authorized construction of a fence, Congress initially did not fully appropriate funds for it (see authorization-appropriation process). "Congress put aside $1.4 billion for the fence, but the whole cost, including maintenance, was pegged at $50 billion over 25 years, according to analyses at the time."[10]

A 2017 GAO report noted: "According to CBP, from fiscal year 2007 through 2015, it spent approximately $2.3 billion to deploy border fencing along the southwest border, and CBP will need to spend a substantial amount to sustain these investments over their lifetimes. CBP did not provide a current life-cycle costs estimate to maintain pedestrian and vehicle fencing, however, in 2009 CBP estimated that maintaining fencing would cost more than $1 billion over 20 years."[12]

Impact and effects
Illegal border-crossings
A report in May 2008 by the Congressional Research Service found "strong indication" that illegal border-crossers had simply found new routes.[13] A 2017 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, citing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data, found that from fiscal year 2010 through fiscal year 2015, the U.S.-Mexico border fence had been breached 9,287 times, at an average cost of $784 per breach to repair.[14] The same GAO report concluded that "CBP cannot measure the contribution of fencing to border security operations along the southwest border because it has not developed metrics for this assessment."[12] GAO noted that because the government lacked such data, it was unable to assess the effectiveness of border fencing, and therefore could not "identify the cost effectiveness of border fencing compared to other assets the agency deploys, including Border Patrol agents and various surveillance technologies."[15]

The fence is routinely climbed or otherwise circumvented.[9] The GAO reported in 2017 that both pedestrian and vehicle barriers have been defeated by various methods, including using ramps to drive vehicles "up and over" vehicle fencing in the sector; scaling, jumping over, or breaching pedestrian fencing; burrowing or tunneling underground; and even using small aircraft.[16] New York Times op-ed writer Lawrence Downes wrote in 2013: "A climber with a rope can hop it in less than half a minute. ... Smugglers with jackhammers tunnel under it. They throw drugs and rocks over it. The fence is breached not just by sunlight and shadows, but also the hooded gaze of drug-cartel lookouts, and by bullets. Border agents describe their job as an unending battle of wits, a cat-mouse game with the constant threat of violence."[9][17]

Environment
Fencing built under the 2006 Secure Fence Act caused habitat fragmentation that adversely affected wildlife, including endangered wildlife. A 2011 study published in the peer-reviewed journal Diversity and Distributions determined that the habitat fragmentation determined that "small range size is associated with a higher risk of extinction, and for some species, the barriers reduce range by as much as 75%."[18] The study identified the most "at risk" species as the Arroyo toad (Anaxyrus californicus), California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), black-spotted newt (Notophthalmus meridionalis), Pacific pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata), and jaguarundi (Puma yagouaroundi). The study also identified coastal California, coastal Texas, and the Madrean Sky Island Archipelago of southeastern Arizona as the three border regions where the barrier posed the greatest risk to wildlife. In Texas, for example, "the border barrier affects 60% to 70% of the habitat in the South Texas Wildlife Refuge Complex, which includes the Laguna Atascosa, Lower Rio Grande Valley, and Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuges."[18]

Violence
A paper by University of Pennsylvania political scientist Benjamin Laughlin estimates that the Secure Fence Act caused at least 2000 additional deaths in the border region.[19] The "construction of the border fence caused fighting between drug cartels by changing the value of territory for smuggling, undermining agreements between cartels."[19]

Proposals for further expansion
The Republican Party's 2012 platform called upon the "double-layered fencing" to be built as originally called for in 2006 law (prior to the 2007 amendment).[20] The Washington Office on Latin America writes that the extremely high cost of complying with the Secure Fence Act's mandate—estimated at US$4.1 billion, or more than the Border Patrol's entire annual budget of US$3.55 billion—was the main reason that the fence was not fully built.[21]

In 2016, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump proposed building a border wall "as high as 55 feet" along the U.S.-Mexican border, making the pledge the centerpiece of his campaign.[9] Trump's proposed wall—which he said would consist of 2,000 miles "of hardened concrete, and ... rebar, and steel" across the entire southern border[22] would be much more extensive than the fencing built under the 2006 act.[10][23] On January 25, 2017, days after taking office, Trump issued Executive Order 13767, directing construction of a U.S. border wall. Such a wall is not under construction, and Congress has not appropriated the funds to build such a wall.[24][25] Experts "have voiced doubts about whether a wall would actually stem illegal immigration, or if it is worth the billions it is expected to cost."[26]
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2019 06:52 pm
Quote:
Experts "have voiced doubts about whether a wall would actually stem illegal immigration

The experts are wrong. The experts want this president and country to fail. They will do anything to accomplish that. Does anyone here walk through the walls in there house?
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -3  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2019 07:01 pm
Quote:
16 Likely Democratic Presidential Candidates Endorse CAIR

CAIR supports Sharia. That should be a reason not to endorse them. They also are tied to terror through Hamas.

https://clarionproject.org/democratic-presidential-candidates-endorse-cair/
Quote:
C.A.I.R. is HAMAS: How the Federal Government Proved that the Council on American Islamic Relations is a Front for Terrorism

https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2016/12/02/c-a-i-r-is-hamas/
neptuneblue
 
  2  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2019 07:17 pm
@coldjoint,
So, because you cannot refute any "reasonable" claim against a border wall, you turn to your tired response about Islam?
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2019 07:29 pm
@hightor,
Quote:
Really, coldjoint, we know you want to spam this thread with Trump-inspired misinformation

The same reason you promote the tired rhetoric you do. Does that work?
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2019 07:35 pm
@neptuneblue,
Quote:
So, because you cannot refute any "reasonable" claim against a border wall, you turn to your tired response about Islam?

That the wall will not be effective is the unreasonable argument here. As far as Islam has ignoring the problem made it any better? Killing fanatics is not enough, the religion is designed to churn them out. The inspiration has to be debunked. Ridicule, the Left's favorite weapon, would be a good start.
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2019 08:15 am
@coldjoint,
If you advocate something ridiculous, expect to get ridiculed.
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2019 11:28 am
@MontereyJack,
Quote:
If you advocate something ridiculous, expect to get ridiculed.

I am not the one saying people can walk through walls, you are.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2019 11:37 am
Quote:
Quick Pathway to Citizenship! Kill Someone & Get Pardoned by Cuomo

Quote:
CUOMO STARTS THE YEAR BY RELEASING MURDERERS

If you wonder what kind of President he would be, look to his New Year’s pardons. He released murderers and other dangerous criminals. In the latest batch of ‘pardoned’ criminals, there are illegal alien felons. Since they were granted a pardon, they cannot be deported. They’re OURS NOW!

“It’s a good way to start the year,” City University of New York School of Law professor Steve Zeidman told The New York Times. “These are wonderful people. There are more people who will be productive on the outside.” Zeidman helped set them free.
They are just so WONDERFUL!

Is that what Democrats support? Releasing murderers to spite he president. What a bunch of true idiots.
http://www.independentsentinel.com/quick-pathway-to-citizenship-kill-someone-get-pardoned-by-cuomo/
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2019 12:31 pm
https://c1.legalinsurrection.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/E-Beer-600-LI.jpg
https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/01/branco-cartoon-booze-cruise-2020/
glitterbag
 
  3  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2019 12:35 pm
@izzythepush,
Its hard to feel sympathy for people who are dependent on assistance to survive, vote to have that assistance talen away from ‘others’ appear shocked when they realize the president is taking it away from them as well.

*by others i mean anyone who isn’t them
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2019 12:42 pm
@coldjoint,
Elizabeth warren drunk is still light years better than trump sober.
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2019 12:48 pm
@MontereyJack,
Quote:
Elizabeth warren drunk is still light years better than trump sober.

Well, that means absolutely nothing. Thanks anyway.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2019 12:53 pm
Oh Oh! Trouble in Utopia. Shocked
Quote:
Bernie’s Dems are About to Pay the Price for his Sexual Harassment Issues

Quote:
Bernie may have lost in 2016, but his people built a comprehensive political machine that embedded radical candidates across the spectrum. Now as the sexual harassment revelations are starting to blow up his campaign, they may take his radical allies with him.

https://bluntforcetruth.com/news/bernies-dems-are-about-to-pay-the-price-for-his-sexual-harassment-issues/
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2019 01:00 pm
@coldjoint,
Now how about getting trump to pay for his.
Baldimo
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2019 01:01 pm
@glitterbag,
Is this in regards to the 3% that the federal govt provides to Meals on Wheels?
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2019 01:03 pm
@MontereyJack,
I'm more worried about the taxpayer money Congress has used to pay off their accusers. When will that info be released?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.18 seconds on 07/08/2025 at 12:39:19