Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
How do you explain the need for a wall to liberals?
Comments
-
A
My question, you dumb shit, is why did democrats vote for wall money then, but now a “wall won’t help”? I blame democrats? When have I done that? Pay attention you dumb fuck. How many times do I need to tell you I don’t want a wall. My point is for the dems it’s not about a wall and if it will help or not, it’s not about immigration or helping immigrants , or money. It’s about preventing trump from fulfilling a campaign promise. That’s their strategy for winning in 2020.2001400ex said:
We've been over this. You blame Democrats. But Republicans could have passed the border wall funding but they don't want it either.MikeDamone said:
Ask Obama and Bernie when they voted to fund physical boarder security in 2006. They must know how it’s going to be used.2001400ex said:
Exactly.. And notice how no one answered my questions? Like what is this money even going to be used for and how will that reduce illegal immigration?UWhuskytskeet said:How do you explain to people that like to waste money on ineffective walls that the majority of illegal immigrants simply overstayed their visas?
Or just admit this is political theater and whatever trump wants, dems are against. Even if they agree with it. Trump could say he wants to foregive all student loans, have free college, and 100% “free” healthcare and they would be against it.
Whatever happened to DACA. That was a big deal a few months ago. Trump said fine, they get amnesty and give me wall money. The dems said fuck you. You will not get a win even if it means we help everyone we pretend we want to help. The “dreamer” horseshit went away after Trump tied it to wall funding. They want dreamers to be fucked so they can be right.
Sad!
That being said, no one still knows what the money will be used for or how it will reduce illegal immigration in a meaningful way. Got it!!!
BTW, Democrats aren't saying they don't want border security. They are saying building a wall won't help. But your response bringing up Obama and Bernie is another perfect simple mind syndrome example. It's almost like a vote for border security is different than a vote for a wall.
Also, you don’t understand the nuclear option. At all.
-
Educate yourself on the difference between that bill and what Trump wants. It's almost like context is lost on you.MikeDamone said:A
My question, you dumb shit, is why did democrats vote for wall money then, but now a “wall won’t help”? I blame democrats? When have I done that? Pay attention you dumb fuck. How many times do I need to tell you I don’t want a wall. My point is for the dems it’s not about a wall and if it will help or not, it’s not about immigration or helping immigrants , or money. It’s about preventing trump from fulfilling a campaign promise. That’s their strategy for winning in 2020.2001400ex said:
We've been over this. You blame Democrats. But Republicans could have passed the border wall funding but they don't want it either.MikeDamone said:
Ask Obama and Bernie when they voted to fund physical boarder security in 2006. They must know how it’s going to be used.2001400ex said:
Exactly.. And notice how no one answered my questions? Like what is this money even going to be used for and how will that reduce illegal immigration?UWhuskytskeet said:How do you explain to people that like to waste money on ineffective walls that the majority of illegal immigrants simply overstayed their visas?
Or just admit this is political theater and whatever trump wants, dems are against. Even if they agree with it. Trump could say he wants to foregive all student loans, have free college, and 100% “free” healthcare and they would be against it.
Whatever happened to DACA. That was a big deal a few months ago. Trump said fine, they get amnesty and give me wall money. The dems said fuck you. You will not get a win even if it means we help everyone we pretend we want to help. The “dreamer” horseshit went away after Trump tied it to wall funding. They want dreamers to be fucked so they can be right.
Sad!
That being said, no one still knows what the money will be used for or how it will reduce illegal immigration in a meaningful way. Got it!!!
BTW, Democrats aren't saying they don't want border security. They are saying building a wall won't help. But your response bringing up Obama and Bernie is another perfect simple mind syndrome example. It's almost like a vote for border security is different than a vote for a wall.
Also, you don’t understand the nuclear option. At all.
https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061026-1.html
Oh yeah.... This is the president of the United States, do you have a better understanding of the nuclear option than our president?
-
You have no idea what Trump wants. Only what he tweets.
-
Oh it's going to be beautiful.sarktastic said:You have no idea what Trump wants. Only what he tweets.
Sarktastic hates the words of his fearless leader. -
He left out 50,000 volts and area denial weapons and mines
-
Yes, i do have a better understanding than Trump. Doesn’t sound like you do though. Dipshit2001400ex said:
Educate yourself on the difference between that bill and what Trump wants. It's almost like context is lost on you.MikeDamone said:A
My question, you dumb shit, is why did democrats vote for wall money then, but now a “wall won’t help”? I blame democrats? When have I done that? Pay attention you dumb fuck. How many times do I need to tell you I don’t want a wall. My point is for the dems it’s not about a wall and if it will help or not, it’s not about immigration or helping immigrants , or money. It’s about preventing trump from fulfilling a campaign promise. That’s their strategy for winning in 2020.2001400ex said:
We've been over this. You blame Democrats. But Republicans could have passed the border wall funding but they don't want it either.MikeDamone said:
Ask Obama and Bernie when they voted to fund physical boarder security in 2006. They must know how it’s going to be used.2001400ex said:
Exactly.. And notice how no one answered my questions? Like what is this money even going to be used for and how will that reduce illegal immigration?UWhuskytskeet said:How do you explain to people that like to waste money on ineffective walls that the majority of illegal immigrants simply overstayed their visas?
Or just admit this is political theater and whatever trump wants, dems are against. Even if they agree with it. Trump could say he wants to foregive all student loans, have free college, and 100% “free” healthcare and they would be against it.
Whatever happened to DACA. That was a big deal a few months ago. Trump said fine, they get amnesty and give me wall money. The dems said fuck you. You will not get a win even if it means we help everyone we pretend we want to help. The “dreamer” horseshit went away after Trump tied it to wall funding. They want dreamers to be fucked so they can be right.
Sad!
That being said, no one still knows what the money will be used for or how it will reduce illegal immigration in a meaningful way. Got it!!!
BTW, Democrats aren't saying they don't want border security. They are saying building a wall won't help. But your response bringing up Obama and Bernie is another perfect simple mind syndrome example. It's almost like a vote for border security is different than a vote for a wall.
Also, you don’t understand the nuclear option. At all.
https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061026-1.html
Oh yeah.... This is the president of the United States, do you have a better understanding of the nuclear option than our president? -
Every time I think Hondos posts can't get any shittier he sets a new bar.
-
The main argument is that 50% of illegal immigration is people overstaying.
So therefore stopping the other 50 is pointless.
Jesus fuck. -
Harry Reid already used the nuclear option for judicial appointments. The Republicans just returned the favor. The filibuster still exists for legislation.2001400ex said:
I have but you can't read. The nuclear option is good enough to approve a supreme court justice but not to pass $5 billion in spending?SFGbob said:State the lie you fucking Kunt?
And I read just fine.
That legislation doesn’t have the 60 votes needed for passage in the Senate, so Trump urged Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to resort to the “nuclear option” and change the rules to pass his pet project with just a simple 51-vote majority.
Now why are you such a dishonest piece of shit Hondo? -
Dishonest? What in your post shows anything about me being dishonest? Answer the question. Why is the nuclear option good enough for a supreme Court Justice but not Trump's wall? I mean it can be done and if Republicans actually want to do it, why don't they?SFGbob said:
Harry Reid already used the nuclear option for judicial appointments. The Republicans just returned the favor. The filibuster still exists for legislation.2001400ex said:
I have but you can't read. The nuclear option is good enough to approve a supreme court justice but not to pass $5 billion in spending?SFGbob said:State the lie you fucking Kunt?
And I read just fine.
That legislation doesn’t have the 60 votes needed for passage in the Senate, so Trump urged Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to resort to the “nuclear option” and change the rules to pass his pet project with just a simple 51-vote majority.
Now why are you such a dishonest piece of shit Hondo? -
Pitchfork51 said:
The main argument is that 50% of illegal immigration is people overstaying.
So therefore stopping the other 50 is pointless.
Jesus fuck.
No that's not the argument. Explain how this $5 billion will actually have a meaningful effect on the other 50. -
A boot right in your lying dishonest Kunt, that's the only response you deserve Hondo. The filibuster for Judicial appointments was destroyed by Harry Reid. Because the GOP understands that blowing up the filibuster for legislation set a very dangerous precedent they aren't willing to be as irresponsible as the Rats. As of right now under the existing rules the GOP still needs 60 votes. You claimed that statement is a lie. As usual, the only liar is you.2001400ex said:
Dishonest? What in your post shows anything about me being dishonest? Answer the question. Why is the nuclear option good enough for a supreme Court Justice but not Trump's wall? I mean it can be done and if Republicans actually want to do it, why don't they?SFGbob said:
Harry Reid already used the nuclear option for judicial appointments. The Republicans just returned the favor. The filibuster still exists for legislation.2001400ex said:
I have but you can't read. The nuclear option is good enough to approve a supreme court justice but not to pass $5 billion in spending?SFGbob said:State the lie you fucking Kunt?
And I read just fine.
That legislation doesn’t have the 60 votes needed for passage in the Senate, so Trump urged Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to resort to the “nuclear option” and change the rules to pass his pet project with just a simple 51-vote majority.
Now why are you such a dishonest piece of shit Hondo?
-
SFGbob said:
A boot right in your lying dishonest Kunt, that's the only response you deserve Hondo. The filibuster for Judicial appointments was destroyed by Harry Reid. Because the GOP understands that blowing up the filibuster for legislation set a very dangerous precedent they aren't willing to be as irresponsible as the Rats. As of right now under the existing rules the GOP still needs 60 votes. You claimed that statement is a lie. As usual, the only liar is you.2001400ex said:
Dishonest? What in your post shows anything about me being dishonest? Answer the question. Why is the nuclear option good enough for a supreme Court Justice but not Trump's wall? I mean it can be done and if Republicans actually want to do it, why don't they?SFGbob said:
Harry Reid already used the nuclear option for judicial appointments. The Republicans just returned the favor. The filibuster still exists for legislation.2001400ex said:
I have but you can't read. The nuclear option is good enough to approve a supreme court justice but not to pass $5 billion in spending?SFGbob said:State the lie you fucking Kunt?
And I read just fine.
That legislation doesn’t have the 60 votes needed for passage in the Senate, so Trump urged Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to resort to the “nuclear option” and change the rules to pass his pet project with just a simple 51-vote majority.
Now why are you such a dishonest piece of shit Hondo?
-
Schumer must think the $5 billion would have an meaning effect since he voted for the secure fence act. Or he’s against it because Trump.2001400ex said:Pitchfork51 said:The main argument is that 50% of illegal immigration is people overstaying.
So therefore stopping the other 50 is pointless.
Jesus fuck.
No that's not the argument. Explain how this $5 billion will actually have a meaningful effect on the other 50. -
Engrish please.MikeDamone said:
Schumer must think the $5 billion would have an meaning effect since he voted for the secure fence act. Or he’s against it because Trump.2001400ex said:Pitchfork51 said:The main argument is that 50% of illegal immigration is people overstaying.
So therefore stopping the other 50 is pointless.
Jesus fuck.
No that's not the argument. Explain how this $5 billion will actually have a meaningful effect on the other 50. -
Hey dipshit....
https://www.politifact.com/california/statements/2018/aug/24/kevin-mccarthy/mostly-true-visa-overstays-account-half-all-people/
I say we go fix this, too. Require ID for everything and boot those folks out who have overstayed their welcome.UWhuskytskeet said:How do you explain to people that like to waste money on ineffective walls that the majority of illegal immigrants simply overstayed their visas?
-
Visa overstay seems simple. Deny ID, deny airport/ train station entry, deny employment, deny school for children, deny US PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, deny all social benefits, without current visa. Ramp up funding for Visa processing staff.
-
There are rules in place for all of that. Tho the Trump admin is not doing a good job enforcing them as there's still 11 million illegals here.sarktastic said:Visa overstay seems simple. Deny ID, deny airport/ train station entry, deny employment, deny school for children, deny US PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, deny all social benefits, without current visa. Ramp up funding for Visa processing staff.
-
There are rules for the border you don’t seem to want to obey
-
Link? Where have I ever said I want an open border?sarktastic said:There are rules for the border you don’t seem to want to obey
-
Fuck off
-
So you make shit up and also can't answer how the funding will help keep illegals out. I'm convinced!!sarktastic said:Fuck off
-
you ok?
-
Doing great. Rose bowl tomorrow. You?sarktastic said:you ok?
-
Government is shut down.
Rose Bowl isn’t cancelled yet? -
Democrats didn't get full communism in yet. Rose bowl is not owned by the government.sarktastic said:Government is shut down.
Rose Bowl isn’t cancelled yet?
