Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

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?

124

Comments

  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    edited December 2018
    A
    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex 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?

    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?
    Ask Obama and Bernie when they voted to fund physical boarder security in 2006. They must know how it’s going to be used.

    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!
    We've been over this. You blame Democrats. But Republicans could have passed the border wall funding but they don't want it either.

    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.
    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.

    Also, you don’t understand the nuclear option. At all.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    edited December 2018

    A

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex 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?

    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?
    Ask Obama and Bernie when they voted to fund physical boarder security in 2006. They must know how it’s going to be used.

    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!
    We've been over this. You blame Democrats. But Republicans could have passed the border wall funding but they don't want it either.

    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.
    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.

    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.

    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?

  • sarktasticsarktastic Member Posts: 9,208
    You have no idea what Trump wants. Only what he tweets.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    You have no idea what Trump wants. Only what he tweets.

    Oh it's going to be beautiful.



    Sarktastic hates the words of his fearless leader.
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 34,240 Standard Supporter
    edited December 2018
    He left out 50,000 volts and area denial weapons and mines
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    2001400ex said:

    A

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex 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?

    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?
    Ask Obama and Bernie when they voted to fund physical boarder security in 2006. They must know how it’s going to be used.

    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!
    We've been over this. You blame Democrats. But Republicans could have passed the border wall funding but they don't want it either.

    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.
    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.

    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.

    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?

    Yes, i do have a better understanding than Trump. Doesn’t sound like you do though. Dipshit
  • Pitchfork51Pitchfork51 Member Posts: 27,023
    The main argument is that 50% of illegal immigration is people overstaying.

    So therefore stopping the other 50 is pointless.


    Jesus fuck.
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 32,661
    edited December 2018
    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    State the lie you fucking Kunt?

    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?
    Harry Reid already used the nuclear option for judicial appointments. The Republicans just returned the favor. The filibuster still exists for legislation.

    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?
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    State the lie you fucking Kunt?

    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?
    Harry Reid already used the nuclear option for judicial appointments. The Republicans just returned the favor. The filibuster still exists for legislation.

    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?
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    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.
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 32,661
    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    State the lie you fucking Kunt?

    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?
    Harry Reid already used the nuclear option for judicial appointments. The Republicans just returned the favor. The filibuster still exists for legislation.

    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?
    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.

  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    State the lie you fucking Kunt?

    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?
    Harry Reid already used the nuclear option for judicial appointments. The Republicans just returned the favor. The filibuster still exists for legislation.

    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?
    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.

    photo B634F428-7E98-42CD-AFE7-C92E1EFF5A1D_zpsnui1bdny.gif
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    2001400ex 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.
    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.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    2001400ex 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.
    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.
    Engrish please.
  • DoogieMcDoogersonDoogieMcDoogerson Member Posts: 2,494
    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.

    How do you explain to people that like to waste money on ineffective walls that the majority of illegal immigrants simply overstayed their visas?

  • sarktasticsarktastic Member Posts: 9,208
    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.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    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.
  • sarktasticsarktastic Member Posts: 9,208
    There are rules for the border you don’t seem to want to obey
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    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?
Sign In or Register to comment.