Law House OKs spending bill with over $5B attached for border wall, sending to Senate as shutdown looms

glenwo2 said:
Probably because there was PLENTY OF ROOM.

So there's THAT!

<36>
Click to expand...
I went from having nothing in my liberal head to having PLENTY OF ROOM?
<JagsKiddingMe>

You need to work on your insults man. I expected a little better.
 
Go Trump!

images

FIGHT FOR 'STEEL SLATS'
MAYHEM IN DC
 
luckyshot said:
Congratulations on your recent big win as well.
Click to expand...

I like and respect you Lucky. Our WR election reminded me that people with different political views can still be good people (it's easy to forget that in these divided times).

So I'm curious: what exactly is your objection to having a wall on the Southern border? Is it that you think illegal immigration is not a problem? Or do you have a better idea about how to address illegal immigration? I don't understand how any rational person doesn't see illegal immigration as a mortal threat to our nation's stability. It's almost like because we've had a century of relative stability, people forget that most of human history is filled with bloody wars—wars over culture, territory, religion, economics, and politics. Why would we choose to introduce that conflict here voluntarily?
 
JamesRussler said:
I don't understand how any rational person doesn't see illegal immigration as a mortal threat to our nation's stability. It's almost like because we've had a century of relative stability, people forget that most of human history is filled with bloody wars—wars over culture, territory, religion, economics, and politics. Why would we choose to introduce that conflict here voluntarily?
Click to expand...
Uh, do you see Mexico as more or less likely to wage an armed ground invasion of the United States in the 21st century than they were in the 20th century?
 
Last edited:
glenwo2 said:
House OKs spending bill with over $5B attached for border wall, sending to Senate as shutdown looms

House approves spending bill with $5.7B for border wall

The House of Representatives Thursday approved a bill that would fund most of the federal government through early February -- and provides $5.7 billion for President Trump's long-promised border wall, increasing the chances of a partial government shutdown later this week.

Eight Republicans joined all 177 voting Democrats to oppose the measure, which passed 217-185. The bill now goes to the Senate, where it is certain to fall short of the 60 votes needed for passage since the chamber's 49 Democrats are against funding the wall. That, in turn, makes it more likely that parts of the federal government, including nine of 15 Cabinet-level departments and dozens of agencies, will cease operations at midnight Friday.

The vote came hours after Trump told House GOP leaders that he would not enact a Senate-passed package that does not provide money for the barrier.

Members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, whose leaders had pushed the hardest for Trump to stand his ground on the wall issue, said in a statement: "Republicans in Congress have continually told the American people that we would fight for wall funding, and today the House of Representatives took its first step toward fulfilling that promise. The Senate must follow our lead. It’s time we do what we said and work with President Trump and the American people to secure our borders."

In a video statement tweeted Thursday afternoon, Trump said he was "fighting very hard for border security" by insisting on funding for the wall, a central promise of his 2016 presidential campaign.



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

Despite his line in the sand, Trump appeared to float one possible path to compromise, referring to "steel slats" at the border rather than the concrete barrier he'd talked about during the campaign. With that phrasing, Trump appeared to be describing fencing, to which Congress is more amenable.

The White House had previously floated another possible workaround, suggesting Trump would approve a deal with no wall dollars and pursue other funding options. Trump said he would use the military to fund and build the wall, while White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said Trump had directed all his Cabinet secretaries to look for usable funds.



I'd prefer he get the Military to build an ACTUAL CONCRETE Wall and not "compromise" to building another fucking FENCE that can be PUSHED DOWN by a Sea of Humanity. <{cruzshake}>


A Fence can be pushed down. You'd need explosives to blow a concrete wall down.
Click to expand...


You want a concrete wall even though the Border Patrol, the actual experts who do the job, don't want a solid concrete wall because they prefer to have visibility through the wall?
 
bobgeese said:
Nice
Click to expand...


This is just Paul Ryan/Freedom Caucus circle jerk. They, and everybody else, know that the bill has no chance in the Senate.. Once again, the Congress is failing to do its job in many ways.
 
JamesRussler said:
I like and respect you Lucky. Our WR election reminded me that people with different political views can still be good people (it's easy to forget that in these divided times).

So I'm curious: what exactly is your objection to having a wall on the Southern border? Is it that you think illegal immigration is not a problem? Or do you have a better idea about how to address illegal immigration? I don't understand how any rational person doesn't see illegal immigration as a mortal threat to our nation's stability. It's almost like because we've had a century of relative stability, people forget that most of human history is filled with bloody wars—wars over culture, territory, religion, economics, and politics. Why would we choose to introduce that conflict here voluntarily?
Click to expand...

You didn't ask me, but one major concern that I have is that the government will to infringe on the property rights of thousands of farmers, ranchers, and landowners by confiscating their land through eminent domain and/or blocking their access to water since the wall is not on the actual border but instead set back into US territory varying amounts.
 
luckyshot said:
Did the House bill have any details about when and how Mexico plans to pay us back?
Click to expand...

Just hypothetically, probably long-term via remittances not leaving the US border. That would pay for the wall in effect.
 
grizzard2bid said:
Just hypothetically, probably long-term via remittances not leaving the US border. That would pay for the wall in effect.
Click to expand...

Or you know not at all. When you consider the shit bills that House has put forward. And the fact that they know it isn't going to get passed. You think they put any thought into it?
 
Thread is tagged “international”.

o_O
 
This shit confuses me. So the Dems control the house and earmarked 5 billion for the wall but the Republican owned Senate is supposed to deny it?

I'll believe it when I see it.
 
Tropodan said:
This shit confuses me. So the Dems control the house and earmarked 5 billion for the wall but the Republican owned Senate is supposed to deny it?

I'll believe it when I see it.
Click to expand...

Dems don't own house yet
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,411
Messages
55,490,051
Members
174,787
Latest member
nicenhot

Share this page

Back
Top