• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

To fund border wall, Trump admin weighs cuts to Coast Guard, airport security

Cardinal said:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...4a8e5c-036f-11e7-ad5b-d22680e18d10_story.html



This is why you're not supposed to let Republicans govern anymore. On the plus side, at least they're coming around to the reality that Mexico isn't paying for ****.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...id=hp_hp-cards_hp-card-politics:homepage/card
Click to expand...

Considering that the TSA is just about the most useless organization ever invented cutting their budget gets two thumbs up from me. I wish we would just do away with them. Most inept bunch of jokers around. All they do is implement a feel good program, while feeling you up, that does nothing to enhance anyone's safety.
 
Porkuloss said:
No argument from me on that. The overlap creates territorial pissing contests.
Click to expand...

If I remember correctly, in at least one case a while back one of the agencies was barred from sending their data results to another agency.
 
Gaius46 said:
Considering that the TSA is just about the most useless organization ever invented cutting their budget gets two thumbs up from me. I wish we would just do away with them. Most inept bunch of jokers around. All they do is implement a feel good program, while feeling you up, that does nothing to enhance anyone's safety.
Click to expand...

DHS/TSA are the domestic cornerstone of the fraud known as the Global War On Terror. Instead of Homeland (isn't there a TV show by that name?), they should have called it Vaterland.
 
Cardinal said:
It's not always easy to tell when his statements are lies and and where he's just being really ****ing stupid. For example, one could claim he was lying when he said that everybody would get everything they wanted under his health care plan, but the recent comment that "Nobody could have known that healthcare would be so difficult" suggests that he was just really ****ing stupid. Likewise, I have to allow for the possibility that he may have actually believed his own position that Mexico would pay for the wall. His complete lack of governing experience and trinary world view (win, lose, revenge) may have enabled him to hold this fantasy.
Click to expand...

"Nobody could have known that healthcare would be so difficult"

Derp.
 
Cardinal said:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...4a8e5c-036f-11e7-ad5b-d22680e18d10_story.html



This is why you're not supposed to let Republicans govern anymore. On the plus side, at least they're coming around to the reality that Mexico isn't paying for ****.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...id=hp_hp-cards_hp-card-politics:homepage/card
Click to expand...

If he cut foreign aid for a year that wall could easily be paid for and he would have money left over to hire a **** load of border agents to man the wall.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/world/which-countries-get-the-most-foreign-aid/

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/09/this-is-what-trumps-border-wall-could-cost-us.html
Here's how much Trump's border wall will cost - Jan. 25, 2017
 
jimbo said:
If I remember correctly, in at least one case a while back one of the agencies was barred from sending their data results to another agency.
Click to expand...

That was supposedly addressed post 9/11. I remember a case where the CIA and FBI actively hid their respective intelligence regarding a Russian spy because each side was afraid it was one of their guys. Pretty sure it's this one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Hanssen
 
shrubnose said:
[/COLOR][/B]



Where and when were you ever able to learn all that a person goes to the news for by just reading a headline?

Fill us in.

I'm sure that this will be a good story.

:lol:
Click to expand...

It's rather simple. All it requires is an objective mindset.

You look at the headline, read the comments from people who respond to said headline, and then read the article that follows. Once it's clear the headline is not accurate, as is the case here, and the posters clearly haven't read the article, the conclusion is quite simple. Obviously they are only interested in the headlines. I have to assume outfits like WaPo count on this, or they wouldn't create all these dog whistles for their followers to respond to.

I'm sure you don't want to establish a deficit in the are of objective thinking shrubnose.

But I could be wrong.
 
ocean515 said:
It's rather simple. All it requires is an objective mindset.

You look at the headline, read the comments from people who respond to said headline, and then read the article that follows. Once it's clear the headline is not accurate, as is the case here, and the posters clearly haven't read the article, the conclusion is quite simple. Obviously they are only interested in the headlines. I have to assume outfits like WaPo count on this, or they wouldn't create all these dog whistles for their followers to respond to.

I'm sure you don't want to establish a deficit in the are of objective thinking shrubnose.

But I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



Headlines do not cover all of the details.

That's what the article is for.

If you don't read the articles you miss out on the details.
 
Ikari said:
Neither is supporting the status quo, lol.
Click to expand...

Trump is not the status quo

I think most Tweebers are afraid to pick a side because then they could be blamed when things go wrong

But as a Tweener they get to say "I told you so" no matter who wins the election
 
American said:
Clearly you decided not to read most of the article where they estimate the real cost, which is far above the $21.6B. Have a nice day.
Click to expand...

So...what do think about gutting the Coast Guard?
 
Cardinal said:
"Initial funding?" How long with you cling to the fantasy that Mexico is paying for anything? As far as I can tell, everybody in the Federal government has abandoned it. The only way that wall is being paid for is cutting services, infrastructure and protection in other agencies.
Click to expand...

I dont care if we pay for the wall and never did care

The important thing is that it get built
 
shrubnose said:
Headlines do not cover all of the details.

That's what the article is for.

If you don't read the articles you miss out on the details.
Click to expand...

No question shrubnose. Yet, reading the responses, its clear many don't make that leap.

Obviously WaPo and others count on that. Spend 5 minutes perusing websites and it becomes abundantly clear.

How about an honest headline for the WaPo piece fronting this thread?

"Trump Administration considers shifting budgets to help pay for Border Wall construction"

Instead we get "To fund border wall, Trump admin weighs cuts to Coast Guard, airport security"

Read into the article and one learns truth.

Nothing but dog whistles for the targeted audience to consume and believe.
 
ocean515 said:
No question shrubnose. Yet, reading the responses, its clear many don't make that leap.

Obviously WaPo and others count on that. Spend 5 minutes perusing websites and it becomes abundantly clear.

How about an honest headline for the WaPo piece fronting this thread?

"Trump Administration considers shifting budgets to help pay for Border Wall construction"

Instead we get "To fund border wall, Trump admin weighs cuts to Coast Guard, airport security"

Read into the article and one learns truth.

Nothing but dog whistles for the targeted audience to consume and believe.
Click to expand...

Uh, "weigh" and "consider" are the same thing. Did you not know what the meaning of "weigh" was?
 
Funny thing about cutting the Coast Guard funds for a 'wall' is all we have to do is look at a map of Mexico and the Gulf of Mexico to see how easy it will be to bypass a wall via the Gulf, and with less Coast Guard patrolling the Gulf, bypassing the wall would be even easier.
 
tres borrachos said:
Uh, "weigh" and "consider" are the same thing. Did you not know what the meaning of "weigh" was?
Click to expand...

Of course I do. Did you know there is no evidence the mission of the Coast Guard and TSA would be impacted by the Trump Administrations review of budgets?

You know exactly what the headline was trying to suggest.
 
Visbek said:
I guess Mexico will have to pay for the US Coast Guard and TSA instead. lol
Click to expand...

Well, since Mexico is buying all this stuff for us...can I have a new Camaro SS please?
 
ocean515 said:
Of course I do. Did you know there is no evidence the mission of the Coast Guard and TSA would be impacted by the Trump Administrations review of budgets?

You know exactly what the headline was trying to suggest.
Click to expand...

Weigh and consider are the same thing. The headline wasn't trying to "suggest" anything other than what was clear to the rest of us who took the time to read it and read the quote boxes in the OP. It's a draft. It's being considered - they are weighing their options. This isn't complicated and stop trying to victimize yourself constantly.
 
So the Mexicans were going to pay for this wall huh? It is both funny and sad seeing these Trump supporters yet again defend and excuse another Trump lie.

They said over and over they are voting for Trump because he was an anti-politician. But it turns out he lies as much, hell he lies more then any politician since Nixon.

I got to wonder when enough will be enough. When the Trump people will finally say that's 1 lie too many, or that lie is just too big to swallow? IDK, it is scary seeing these people give an egomaniac like Trump a free reign to lie about everything.
 
tres borrachos said:
Weigh and consider are the same thing. The headline wasn't trying to "suggest" anything other than what was clear to the rest of us who took the time to read it and read the quote boxes in the OP. It's a draft. It's being considered - they are weighing their options. This isn't complicated and stop trying to victimize yourself constantly.
Click to expand...

Lay off Tres. If you can't control yourself, move on. I'm no victim, so flush that kind of BS.

The headline is a dog whistle from the frauds at WaPo. Reading responses on this thread illustrates that most people don't read the articles and only work off the headlines.

The headline was meant to suggest the Trump Administration was looking to put citizens at higher risk, which is 180 degrees from what is the truth.

How about this headline: Trump Administration looking for ways to reverse the threat of Obama's Open Border policies
 
In fairness to Donald Buffoon - er - Donald Trump; the report is talking about an idea drawn up. There is yet no proof that the Trump Administration would actually take up the plan.

I am not going to condemn someone for something they have neither done or even directly spoken of doing yet.

Frankly, I highly doubt a guy as nationalistic and protectionist (and xenophobic) as Trump would agree to cut funds to the Coast Guard.
 
ocean515 said:
Lay off Tres. If you can't control yourself, move on. I'm no victim, so flush that kind of BS.

The headline is a dog whistle from the frauds at WaPo. Reading responses on this thread illustrates that most people don't read the articles and only work off the headlines.

The headline was meant to suggest the Trump Administration was looking to put citizens at higher risk, which is 180 degrees from what is the truth.

How about this headline: Trump Administration looking for ways to reverse the threat of Obama's Open Border policies
Click to expand...

The headline isn't a "dog whistle". It's a fact. A draft exists that shows the Trump administration is weighing cuts to the Coast Guard and the TSA. Unless you can prove the draft is a fake, the headline is right. It has nothing to do with risk. It's a fact unless you can prove it wrong.

Why is this so difficult for you?

And do we need some sort of headline that Trump is looking to change Obama's border policies? Everyone who hasn't been sleeping under a rock for the last 18 months knows that.
 
Cardinal said:
"Initial funding?" How long with you cling to the fantasy that Mexico is paying for anything? As far as I can tell, everybody in the Federal government has abandoned it. The only way that wall is being paid for is cutting services, infrastructure and protection in other agencies.
Click to expand...
Maybe Trump could import the undocumented Eastern European labor that built his hotels, have them build it and then refuse to pay em. Free wall!
 
tres borrachos said:
The headline isn't a "dog whistle". It's a fact. A draft exists that shows the Trump administration is weighing cuts to the Coast Guard and the TSA. Unless you can prove the draft is a fake, the headline is right. It has nothing to do with risk. It's a fact unless you can prove it wrong.

Why is this so difficult for you?

And do we need some sort of headline that Trump is looking to change Obama's border policies? Everyone who hasn't been sleeping under a rock for the last 18 months knows that.
Click to expand...

I base my comments on observations and the objective of WaPo. Clearly the headline had the desired effect among WaPo's target audience.

You are welcome to ignore that fact along with the effort being waged by the left's MSM partners.
 
ocean515 said:
I base my comments on observations and the objective of WaPo. Clearly the headline had the desired effect among WaPo's target audience.

You are welcome to ignore that fact along with the effort being waged by the left's MSM partners.
Click to expand...

You base your comments on the "MSM is fake news" meme that Trump has gotten you to continue on his behalf.

There is nothing wrong with this headline and you do know it, you just won't admit it because you want to actually deflect from what's being discussed (how is Trump going to pay for his wall, where is he going to take the money from, what is being considered (aka "weighed") today) to a typical "The MSM are big meanies!" whine fest we've all come to expect from the Trump devotees.

Carry on in your victimhood.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom