The Border Wall or Fence

[Raider5678]

31 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Let's look at the full quote:

Don't even bother. TenOz and iNow can claim you said anything they like, and they'll rack up a total of 18 upvotes over the last three pages. Equivalent to patting themselves on the back.

However opposing them posts have racked up -11 votes.

 

And they continually refuse to even address what you say. They simply straw man you and then continue to argue with you over something you never said. 

I figured at some point a moderator would step in and point out how much they're lying about what's being said, but that's clearly not going to happen. I suggest just letting it go.

[John Cuthber]

56 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Let's look at the full quote:

12 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Not suggesting less blame to Trump, but say, additional to Trump, and finally some to the Democrats as well? If only for goading Trump and leaving him no "egomaniacal room" whatsoeve

Is asking a question not sometimes a way of making a statement?
It doesn't help that the question is so poorly worded.

[zapatos]

40 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

And they continually refuse to even address what you say. They simply straw man you and then continue to argue with you over something you never said. 

I figured at some point a moderator would step in and point out how much they're lying about what's being said, but that's clearly not going to happen. I suggest just letting it go.

Nice job of letting it go.

[Ten oz]

1 hour ago, MigL said:

If you, INow and Rangerx don't appreciate alternative viewpoints,

Nothing in your last several posts addresses this topics thread. You are not providing any view point as it relates to border security.

The one comment you made a few pages back was that Democrats should just give Trump what he wants so the govt can re-open. No additional details on that from you. You just feel that since Trump is irresponsible Democrats have a responsibility to resolve this by yeilding to his demands. I suppose that viewpoint address the shutdown at some shallow level but not border security or the wall. 

If Democrats fold and give Trump what he wants why would Trump do this again 8 months from now in September? 

 

[J.C.MacSwell]

Just now, John Cuthber said:

Is asking a question not sometimes a way of making a statement?
 

It can be. That is why you need proper context, and you certainly shouldn't assume it. It was asking a question about a future hypothetical...so if you had inferred from that that I might think the Democrats could still become blameful, I think that would be fair.

 

8 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

It doesn't help that the question is so poorly worded.

Maybe. I think I make a reasonable effort to be precise. I'm no wordsmith, but I think it is more that some people are reading it with a preconceived idea of opinions i might hold.

Compare it to MigL's that I put in quotes above. I have no idea how he could have made himself clearer. Is there any doubt in your mind that he blamed Trump more than anyone else?

Mine was a question, so I don't think I needed to make it clear how I myself might distribute blame,

 

[rangerx]

3 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

 I have no idea how he could have made himself clearer. Is there any doubt in your mind that he blamed Trump more than anyone else?

I appealed to MigL to extend his compassion for starving children (in his analogy) to other kids (at the wall) AND gave credit to his Trump position AND you agreed.

Now you're both lumping me in with a group who doesn't appreciate alternate points while pissing and moaning about getting lumped into something phony.

That's not discussion, that's sore losing.
 

[Ten oz]

On 1/10/2019 at 8:57 PM, MigL said:

It just seems to me that compromise seems to be forgotten in contemporary American politics.
You'd be adding one third more wall to the southern border.
Is winning the ideological fight worth the hardships of government workers without pay, a nation without a government, and an effectively closed border while this absurdity plays out ?

I expect D Trump to be an uncompromising jacka*ss.
But I thought we should expect better from a Democrat controlled Congress.

Please explain it to me, INow.

MigL is clearly stating that Democrats aren't compromising enough. Say he'd expect better does imply a level of blame for the current situation.

On 1/10/2019 at 9:13 PM, J.C.MacSwell said:

I've said this before in other threads, but I don't think the polarization and rhetoric would have gotten to the level it has if there was a third party in the US.

There has to be some pretty fertile ground in the middle for moderates right now...but they would be outcasts to either party.

J.C. is clearly implying that both parties (Democrats and Republicans) are behaving at opposing extremes. 

On 1/11/2019 at 9:34 AM, J.C.MacSwell said:

You mean how can I say their behaviour is bad?

They can do their part by making a case that they can convince Trump that there are better solutions to the problem available than building a wall, and stop calling the idea of one immoral.

What is the value of the 5.7 billion dollars of Wall. 2 Billion? Zero? negative amount?

J.C.  is clearly complaining that Democrats are not doing their part. A level of blame for the current situation is implied.

On 1/11/2019 at 4:25 PM, MigL said:

Let's be clear...
There is no rationale for building this wall
It is not functionally effective, nor cost effective.
And giving in to D Trump might embolden him to pull the same stunt again,

But as INow has said...
"I’m also not the one you need to convince, nor am I getting crushed by a missed paycheck tomorrow, or struggling to feed my kids due to missed food stamps, nor am I a soybean or hog farmer missing the bailout checks promised to alleviate the suffering the China trade war is causing, or any of the hundreds of thousands of other people being used as pawns by the man sworn to serve and protect us all. "

Is the government not supposed to take care of its people ?
If D Trump is going to be a jacka*ss, there isn't much that can be done about it (  short of impeachment, that's how American government runs ), so who is going to look after the people that INow has mentioned ?
Are they on their own ?
Are they pawns being used, and extorted by D Trump AND those opposed to him ?

I don't want to see a wall built either, but I REALLY don't want to see people suffer needlessly because their government is dysfunctional.

MigL is asking what I read as rhetorical questions here to imply that federal workers are being "extorted by D Trump AND those opposed to him". Those opposed are obviously Democrats and MigL even bothered to emphasize the point by capitalizing "AND".

Above are just a couple posts a piece. There are many more but I see no point in wasting even more space. Especially when there is a very high probability you both will deny the nature of your statements anyway. You both keep inserting digs at Democrats which imply they are also at blame for the current state of affairs and the shutdown. So when I posted ""You both seem hung up on ensuring blame for the currently situation be evenly spread" it accurately described what I am perceiving in your posts. You two do "seem hung up". 

Can we get back on topic now? 

[iNow]

1 hour ago, Raider5678 said:

TenOz and iNow can claim you said anything they like, and they'll rack up a total of 18 upvotes over the last three pages. Equivalent to patting themselves on the back.

 However opposing them posts have racked up -11 votes.

Whoa whoa whoa... Wait a minute. So, you’re saying that the more popular positions are getting more positive votes than the less popular positions, and that all of this is happening in a Politics thread no less? Wow, you’re right! There’s just no explaining that. 

Kidding aside... I understand that many of us disagree, but only some of us are here being disagreeable. IMO, that’s a far better explanation for the voting behavior than people just “patting themselves on the back.”

Also, focusing on rep points isn’t much better than focusing on posters. It shows perhaps a paucity in your stance.

Now... for the umpteenth time... Can we PLEASE for the love of Thor stay on the actual GD topic for a while?

[J.C.MacSwell]

32 minutes ago, rangerx said:

I appealed to MigL to extend his compassion for starving children (in his analogy) to other kids (at the wall) AND gave credit to his Trump position AND you agreed.

Now you're both lumping me in with a group who doesn't appreciate alternate points while pissing and moaning about getting lumped into something phony.

That's not discussion, that's sore losing.
 

I'm not trying to win. At least not trying to defeat anybody. I do feel I've lost when the discussion goes South (seriously anyone let me know if that has become politically correct, i do not know the history behind it). I don't think anyone else wins either.

 

9 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

J.C. is clearly implying that both parties (Democrats and Republicans) are behaving at opposing extremes. 

Not extremes, but certainly enough to leave a lot of fertile ground in the middle as I said.

 

9 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

J.C.  is clearly complaining that Democrats are not doing their part. A level of blame for the current situation is implied.

It is. I will stand by that one also.

So you have two minor examples where I have in fact assessed some blame toward the Democrats. 

Why is it that you find it so unacceptable to hold this position, and find the need to mischaracterize it to the degree you do?

If you wish to stay on topic, why do you so consistently do this?

Edited January 20, 2019 by J.C.MacSwell

[rangerx]

22 minutes ago, iNow said:

Now... for the umpteenth time... Can we PLEASE for the love of Thor stay on the actual GD topic for a while?

Well, the OP is kinda vague. Border wall or fence. Not to be contrarian, but what does that even entail?

Pick your poison? Head I win, tails you lose? Is it okay if I call you Betty or would rather be called Sue?

Is the absence or discussion of the reasoning for "none of the above" off topic?
 

To that end, I say neither. There are greater priorities at hand than placating republican fabricated monsters.

[J.C.MacSwell]

5 minutes ago, rangerx said:

Well, the OP is kinda vague. Border wall or fence. Not to be contrarian, but what does that even entail?

Pick your poison? Head I win, tails you lose? Is it okay if I call you Betty or would rather be called Sue?

Is the absence or discussion of the reasoning for "none of the above" off topic?
 

To that end, I say neither. There are greater priorities at hand than placating republican fabricated monsters.

If all that the Democrats allow Trump is a small picket fence...Trump will call it a wall...paid for by the Mexicans...

(disclaimer: no small animals or Democrats were hurt in attempting that joke...)

Edited January 20, 2019 by J.C.MacSwell

[rangerx]

1 minute ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

If all that the Democrats allow Trump is a small picket fence...Trump will call it a wall...paid for by the Mexicans...

Then so be it.

I'm thinking maybe we should build a wall and make America pay for it.

Fair is fair, right?

[J.C.MacSwell]

Just now, rangerx said:

Then so be it.

I'm thinking maybe we should build a wall and make America pay for it.

Fair is fair, right?

I am sure Trump would agree with that. Country north of the border decides whether to build one, country south of it pays for it. Makes complete sense. 

We just need to elect a wingnut Prime Minister and get it started.

[rangerx]

1 minute ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I am sure Trump would agree with that. Country north of the border decides whether to build one, country south of it pays for it. Makes complete sense. 

Absolutely. There's a crisis south of that border. They're rapists although I'm sure some of them are good people.

If in a couple years America doesn't pay for it, we'll just saddle Canadians with the cost, but first we'll hold government employees hostage.

Good plan?

[J.C.MacSwell]

1 minute ago, rangerx said:

Absolutely. There's a crisis south of that border. They're rapists although I'm sure some of them are good people.

If in a couple years America doesn't pay for it, we'll just saddle Canadians with the cost, but first we'll hold government employees hostage.

Good plan?

Agree. I have this American friend even. He's a very clever and astute American...

[Ten oz]

56 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

So you have two minor examples where I have in fact assessed some blame toward the Democrats. 

Why is it that you find it so unacceptable to hold this position, and find the need to mischaracterize it to the degree you do?

If you wish to stay on topic, why do you so consistently do this?

There are many more than just the 2 examples. I only quoted those two for the sake of brevity.  Also the characterization you are complaining about is "seem hung up". It is a statement of opinion and not one of fact. I also never called it unacceptable. It is your prerogative to feel Democrats deserve some of the blame. Where we are running into problems is your denial that you have been suggesting partial blame lays with Democrats. You have. 

I brought it back up because Raider accused me of lying which you seconded calling calling it "intentionally misleading". Considering you concede "minor examples" do in fact exist there is justification for my statement which means it is neither a lie or "intentionally misleading".

If you feel Democrats are not being  compromising enough on Border Security lets discuss that. What does DHS need to better security the border that Democrats are refusing to let them have?

[rangerx]

16 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Agree. I have this American friend even. He's a very clever and astute American...

Nice. If only they'd learn to speak Canadian, we'd welcome them to come in legally. There's plenty of landscaping and cleaning jobs available that us canucks are too lazy or too proud to do.

No path to citizenship though. Amnesty is off the table and we'll separate them from their children if they think about thinking coming illegally.

And of course, we can detain or deport them for no reason or perhaps trundle them off to some non-Warsaw pact country for enhanced interrogation.

Edited January 20, 2019 by rangerx

[J.C.MacSwell]

6 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

There are many more than just the 2 examples. I only quoted those two for the sake of brevity.  Also the characterization you are complaining about is "seem hung up". . I also never called it unacceptable. It is your prerogative to feel Democrats deserve some of the blame. Where we are running into problems is your denial that you have been suggesting partial blame lays with Democrats. You have. 

I brought it back up because Raider accused me of lying which you seconded calling calling it "intentionally misleading". Considering you concede "minor examples" do in fact exist there is justification for my statement which means it is neither a lie or "intentionally misleading".

If you feel Democrats are not being  compromising enough on Border Security lets discuss that. What does DHS need to better security the border that Democrats are refusing to let them have?

Keep them coming. You've already found them so let's see them. Out with them.

 

1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

 

I brought it back up because Raider accused me of lying which you seconded calling calling it "intentionally misleading". Considering you concede "minor examples" do in fact exist there is justification for my statement which means it is neither a lie or "intentionally misleading".

I think this pretty much sums it up. You set the bar, for yourself, much too low IMO. 

1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

If you feel Democrats are not being  compromising enough on Border Security lets discuss that. What does DHS need to better security the border that Democrats are refusing to let them have?

With you? Why bother?

[J.C.MacSwell]

7 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

Don't even bother. TenOz and iNow can claim you said anything they like, and they'll rack up a total of 18 upvotes over the last three pages. Equivalent to patting themselves on the back.

However opposing them posts have racked up -11 votes.

 

And they continually refuse to even address what you say. They simply straw man you and then continue to argue with you over something you never said. 

I figured at some point a moderator would step in and point out how much they're lying about what's being said, but that's clearly not going to happen. I suggest just letting it go.

Raider. I would not put too much attention to up and down votes. I don't believe you do as you post true to your beliefs, but if you would like to here it would be good to listen to INow.

 

5 hours ago, iNow said:

Whoa whoa whoa... Wait a minute. So, you’re saying that the more popular positions are getting more positive votes than the less popular positions, and that all of this is happening in a Politics thread no less? Wow, you’re right! There’s just no explaining that. 

Kidding aside... I understand that many of us disagree, but only some of us are here being disagreeable. IMO, that’s a far better explanation for the voting behavior than people just “patting themselves on the back.”

Also, focusing on rep points isn’t much better than focusing on posters. It shows perhaps a paucity in your stance.

Now... for the umpteenth time... Can we PLEASE for the love of Thor stay on the actual GD topic for a while?

Here is a good example of one of his better post in terms of upticks, currently +4, so presumably a very agreeable post. I'm sure we can all agree on that, regardless of any political positions:

11 hours ago, iNow said:

Kidnapper abducts 50 of your colleagues. Says he will only release them if you let him have sex with your wife. You say, no. Are you now responsible for the 50 colleagues being held hostage? Of course not. The magnitude of stupid required to suggest such a thing is overwhelming. 

Kidnapper says, fine.  Let me have sex with your wife, I’ll also return the many items I stole from your home last year, and will additionally agree not to steal anything else for 2 more years. Agree to this and I’ll release the hostages. Understandably, you again say, no. Are you now responsible for the 50 colleagues being held hostage? Of course not. Are you the one now at fault for “not compromising” with the kidnapper? Of course not. The magnitude of stupid required to suggest such a thing is overwhelming. 

“What if you just let him put it in the butt?? that’s a compromise” ... that’s where this conversation has devolved into. No. Not just no, but hell no.

Yet that’s precisely what’s happening here when posters keep saying Democrats are the ones responsible despite their MANY votes attempting to reopen government and to get workers paid, and despite the obvious obstacle here being Mitch McConnel and the president for refusing to even allow a vote. 

Now, you can probably learn a ton more in the Science section by reading a Janus +1 or +2, but that's doing it the hard way.

Edited January 21, 2019 by J.C.MacSwell

[iNow]

31 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I would not put too much attention to up and down votes. I don't believe you do as you post true to your beliefs, but if you would like to here it would be good to listen to INow.

You’ve been asked politely and repeatedly to please focus on the topic and not fellow posters. Ten Oz is right. This behavior and it’s persistence shows serious Venn diagram overlap with the ad hom fallacy. It doesn’t matter, though. You can talk about me all you want and have fun doing so.

We agree that federal workers should not be held hostage like this and that people are being made to needlessly suffer. 

We agree that there is bad faith being shown across the aisle and that all of this is ridiculous. 

We even agree that responsibility and ownership of this mess is not equivalently shared. 

We agree that the shutdown needs to end and we agree that border security is important. 

Am I correct so far? Have I said anything whatsoever that leads you to want to dismiss me as a leftist who is intentionally misrepresenting you or suffering from some type of ideologically driven blindness?

Lets start with that. I want to understand you. I want us to be partners. I find it hard sometimes and I’m asking you to partner with me to make it easier. 

[J.C.MacSwell]

20 minutes ago, iNow said:

 Ten Oz is right. This behavior and it’s persistence shows serious Venn diagram overlap with the ad hom fallacy. 

 

You have a serious bias if you feel I instigated any of this. Any personal attacks were in kind, except I have never attempted to mischaracterize your positions. Ten oz is not right on this. You have repeatedly admonished me for replying in the exact same manner he attacked me with. He makes clear mischaracterizations of positions. Following complaints or attacks with an appeal to get back on topic is disingenuous. If you or he don't want replies to your negative comments don't make them. If you want to discuss this further you should PM me.

27 minutes ago, iNow said:

We agree that federal workers should not be held hostage like this and that people are being made to needlessly suffer. 

We agree that there is bad faith being shown across the aisle and that all of this is ridiculous. 

We even agree that responsibility and ownership of this mess is not equivalently shared. 

We agree that the shutdown needs to end and we agree that border security is important. 

Am I correct so far?

I can agree with those four statements as written. 

 

 

 

 

[iNow]

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I can agree with those four statements as written

Excellent. Moving on then:

We should focus on getting Democrats to capitulate instead of focusing on McConnell to allow a vote in the Republican controlled Senate on any of the bills the Democratic controlled House has already passed.

Yes or no?

Edited January 21, 2019 by iNow

[J.C.MacSwell]

22 minutes ago, iNow said:

Excellent. Moving on then:

We should focus on getting Democrats to capitulate instead of focusing on McConnell to allow a vote in the Republican controlled Senate on any of the bills the Democratic controlled House has already passed.

Yes or no?

Yes or No?

No.

Your turn...

We should focus on getting McConnell to allow a vote in the Republican controlled Senate on any of the bills the Democratic controlled House has already passed instead of focusing on getting Democrats to capitulate. 

Yes or no?

[iNow]

29 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

No

Excellent.

How then do you recommend we go about convincing the GOP led Senate to schedule the vote which you and I seem to agree ought to occur?

[J.C.MacSwell]

3 minutes ago, iNow said:

Excellent.

How then do you recommend we go about convincing the GOP led Senate to schedule the vote which you and I seem to agree ought to occur?

Tell him they should have a meeting with the Democrat Senators to explore possible ideas of how to break the impasse, including that one.

You didn't answer my question, but that's fine. 

How  do you recommend we go about convincing the GOP led Senate to schedule the vote which seems unlikely to occur, but I agree ought to?