Politics Securing The Border With A Wall, Duh (1 Viewer)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Users who are viewing this thread

House approves spending bill with $5.7B for border wall

By Samuel Chamberlain | Fox News

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.

"We need the wall. The Democrats know it, everybody knows it," Trump said. "It's only a game when they say, 'You don’t need the wall.' ... They want to try and do anything possible to hurt us because of the fact it’s politics. I understand that. I don’t even hold it against them, except you should always put your country first and they’re not doing that."

"Watch what happens," Trump said in concluding his statement.


Trump insists walls 'work better than anything'
Trump says funding bill must include border security; chief White House correspondent John Roberts reports.

The Senate measure, which passed by voice vote late Wednesday, provided a total of $1.6 billion for border security but did not include funding for a border wall. Trump's allies had warned him that he would have even less leverage to demand wall funding after Democrats take control of the House on Jan. 3 and worried that Trump's failure to make good on his signature campaign promise could hamper his re-election campaign.

After meeting with Trump at the White House earlier Thursday, House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., told reporters that Trump had told them he would not sign the measure out of "legitimate concerns for border security."

Conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh said Trump had "gotten word" to him that he would either be "getting funding to the border or he's shutting the whole thing down." A day earlier, Limbaugh complained that it appeared "Trump gets nothing and the Democrats get everything, including control of the House."

House passes procedural vote for a new government spending bill; House Majority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy weighs in.

The president issued threatening tweets and a stern statement from his press secretary before calling Republican lawmakers to the White House, where he told them he wasn't on board with the Senate measure, which would fund much of the government through Feb. 8.

"I am asking Congress to defend the border of our nation," Trump said at a White House event. "Walls work, whether we like it or not."

Ratcheting up the suspense, Trump added: "I look forward to signing a bill that fulfills our fundamental duty to the American people ... we'll see what we can do."

Democratic leaders were incredulous Thursday evening, with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., saying the president was throwing a "temper tantrum."

"Today's events have made one thing clear: President Trump is plunging the country into chaos," said Schumer, referencing the resignation of Defense Secretary James Mattis in addition to the pending shutdown. " ... The Trump temper tantrum may produce a government shutdown. It will not get him his wall ... Donald Trump wants a shutdown and [Republicans] seem to be so afraid that they're going to go along. We'll see."



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.

Fox News' Alex Pappas and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-approves-spending-bill-with-5b-for-border-wall
 
Last edited:
What kind of healthcare do you have? Care to answer?

Obviously, it depends on what kind of healthcare I need, if any, at whatever time.

Beautiful Central Oregon has excellent healthcare facilities. We have an excellent doctor.

Care to be more specific?
 
House approves spending bill with $5.7B for border wall

By Samuel Chamberlain | Fox News

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.

"We need the wall. The Democrats know it, everybody knows it," Trump said. "It's only a game when they say, 'You don’t need the wall.' ... They want to try and do anything possible to hurt us because of the fact it’s politics. I understand that. I don’t even hold it against them, except you should always put your country first and they’re not doing that."

"Watch what happens," Trump said in concluding his statement.


Trump insists walls 'work better than anything'
Trump says funding bill must include border security; chief White House correspondent John Roberts reports.

The Senate measure, which passed by voice vote late Wednesday, provided a total of $1.6 billion for border security but did not include funding for a border wall. Trump's allies had warned him that he would have even less leverage to demand wall funding after Democrats take control of the House on Jan. 3 and worried that Trump's failure to make good on his signature campaign promise could hamper his re-election campaign.

After meeting with Trump at the White House earlier Thursday, House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., told reporters that Trump had told them he would not sign the measure out of "legitimate concerns for border security."

Conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh said Trump had "gotten word" to him that he would either be "getting funding to the border or he's shutting the whole thing down." A day earlier, Limbaugh complained that it appeared "Trump gets nothing and the Democrats get everything, including control of the House."

House passes procedural vote for a new government spending bill; House Majority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy weighs in.

The president issued threatening tweets and a stern statement from his press secretary before calling Republican lawmakers to the White House, where he told them he wasn't on board with the Senate measure, which would fund much of the government through Feb. 8.

"I am asking Congress to defend the border of our nation," Trump said at a White House event. "Walls work, whether we like it or not."

Ratcheting up the suspense, Trump added: "I look forward to signing a bill that fulfills our fundamental duty to the American people ... we'll see what we can do."

Democratic leaders were incredulous Thursday evening, with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., saying the president was throwing a "temper tantrum."

"Today's events have made one thing clear: President Trump is plunging the country into chaos," said Schumer, referencing the resignation of Defense Secretary James Mattis in addition to the pending shutdown. " ... The Trump temper tantrum may produce a government shutdown. It will not get him his wall ... Donald Trump wants a shutdown and [Republicans] seem to be so afraid that they're going to go along. We'll see."



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.

Fox News' Alex Pappas and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-approves-spending-bill-with-5b-for-border-wall
Oh yeah, that's gonna cruise right thru the Republican Senate. It's gonna happen any day now.
 
Obviously, it depends on what kind of healthcare I need, if any, at whatever time.

Beautiful Central Oregon has excellent healthcare facilities. We have an excellent doctor.

Care to be more specific?
Who is your excellent doctor, doctor Vinnie Boombatz?
 
It's nice that Trump brings all the wingnuts out into the light to do their lack-of-virtue signalling.

barfo
 
Spending $5billion on a border wall is a waste of money. Immigrants will simply use ladders and dig tunnels. It's not going to stop them.
 
48420524_786748541679101_399432808931524608_n.jpg
 
They're not wingnuts, please use the politically correct term, Deep Bunker. It's like the Deep State but with guns and survival gear.
You are describing the Prayer Boys. They are wingnuts with guns and survival gear.
 
but we're not stupid so we both strongly support Obama Care. In fact, we support everything Obama did, or at least all I can think of off the top of my head.

You used "stupid", I won't (to keep this away from the poster and onto the post), but if one supported every single thing any President did, one isn't smart, one is a sycophant. I mean, just the issues of keeping GTMO open and keeping troops in Afghanistan are anathema to what got you to vote for him. Going after state-legal marijuana growers? Executive orders to force immigration policy? You support all of these? When he opened up the Arctic for drilling in 2015? Or when he closed it again in 2016? Selling Iran nuclear manufacturing technology, but revoking their purchase of air-defense technology? How can you do both?

If this was hyperbole for comic effect, I obviously missed it.
 
Most people that ridicule Obama Care typically have better private care from their employer but regardless, they are pretty ignorant. Those that don't have better health care somewhere else are also ignorant only even more ignorant.
I ridicule ObamaCare because it literally does nothing for "care", and only makes it a) that the government is imposing a false prop for prices to go up without accountability, b) that it places every dollar of healthcare through a filter of "insurance", and c) taxes those who don't want to participate in a broken and corrupt scheme.

If Obama has imposed a tax in order to fund 1 million new doctors, 10 million new nurses, $1B in medical research grants to universities and opening up 500 new hospitals, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Generally, only those who have "pre-existing" (expensive) conditions and therefore don't care who or how it gets paid, as long as it isn't on them; and those who want more government control over their lives like the concept of taxing us to get profit to insurance companies. Hell, even insurance company shareholders don't like the idea. But go ahead and generalize pejoratively...that's working well to get a better solution.
 
I ridicule ObamaCare because it literally does nothing for "care", and only makes it a) that the government is imposing a false prop for prices to go up without accountability, b) that it places every dollar of healthcare through a filter of "insurance", and c) taxes those who don't want to participate in a broken and corrupt scheme.

If Obama has imposed a tax in order to fund 1 million new doctors, 10 million new nurses, $1B in medical research grants to universities and opening up 500 new hospitals, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Generally, only those who have "pre-existing" (expensive) conditions and therefore don't care who or how it gets paid, as long as it isn't on them; and those who want more government control over their lives like the concept of taxing us to get profit to insurance companies. Hell, even insurance company shareholders don't like the idea. But go ahead and generalize pejoratively...that's working well to get a better solution.

and the ridiculous bill the republicans tried to shove through a year ago to replace it was great? lmao! The Affordable Care Act has been successful whether you like it or not and even Obama said there will be some tweaks likely needed. Trump is so obsessed with removing Obama from history where it will likely be him that makes even more history, but in a bad way.
 
and the ridiculous bill the republicans tried to shove through a year ago to replace it was great? lmao!
WtAF?
The Affordable Care Act has been successful whether you like it or not and even Obama said there will be some tweaks likely needed.
You can't possibly claim that with the original metrics and key performance parameters, so I won't make you try.
Trump is so obsessed with removing Obama from history where it will likely be him that makes even more history, but in a bad way.
Again, WtAF?

I mean, when you can't talk objectively about the failings of a bill without #orangemanbad happening...

path_I_cant_follow_star_wars.gif
 
Along with that wall, why don't adopt some more 16th century defense solutions like muskets, castles, bows and arrows, slingshots?
 
I know you guys think this stuff is funny but that poor girl can't help the way she looks.

Right? I don't like her one bit, but come on... it's low brow to do that. I find humor in creativity, not in tearing down someone based on their appearance.

If it had just been a picture of her with the words... It'd of been funny.
 
WtAF?
You can't possibly claim that with the original metrics and key performance parameters, so I won't make you try.
Again, WtAF?

I mean, when you can't talk objectively about the failings of a bill without #orangemanbad happening...

path_I_cant_follow_star_wars.gif

Is that your way of not having an educated response and instead I get the double WtAF, lOL? Good luck on your path.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/19/cbo...umber-of-uninsured-by-27-million-by-2020.html

https://www.pastemagazine.com/artic...ws-poll-obamacares-popularity-is-at-an-a.html

Have a nice evening.
 
One thing Obamacare has done that people tend to forget, is it eliminated lifetime limits on benefits from health insurance companies. Thank God it did.

Let me ask you, what would you do for children born with permanent disabilities that will require more than $1 million in hospital bills.

Should they have their care denied? Should their parents have to go bankrupt at no fault of their own (other than having a child)?

Hate to break it to some of you, but $1 million in health care ain't what it used to be.
 
Back
Top