Opinion | Democrat’s New Year’s Resolution: Make Trump Open the Government Without Border Funding

broken wall

 

January 3rd will mark the beginning of the era of ‘short leash’ Donald, where Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the rest of the incoming House dems will have subpoena power and a mandate from the American public to hold the alt-president accountable.

If Trump thinks he’s going to hold the country hostage to get five billion for his wall, he’s going to have a really big problem explaining why he said beforehand that he would be happy to shut it down, adding that he would not blame Democrats…And then he blamed Democrats.

For those who are just joining the political discussion, Trump painted himself into a corner with his last minute demand for $5B to fund a border wall that nobody wanted or currently wants to pursue.

Once his plan backfired and the partial shutdown started, he felt forced to stand his ground by declaring that he would shut down the southern border using (and essentially abusing the power of) the U.S. military.

shortly after submitting his empty threat, he made the desperate claim that the impacted federal employees actually supported the shutdown because they ultimately supported the wall. The alt-president’s claim was quickly shot down by Union leaders. After all, why would he tell his own supporters so coldly to trade their physical labor for rent?

He foolishly expects the Democrats to cave under the pressure he’s putting furloughed employees through. It won’t work.

And, guess what? He’s still not getting the wall and the government should be shut down until we get him to acknowledge his own failure by signing a bill to reopen without his border money. Yes, not simply less money for it. I’m saying absolutely  no border wall money at all.

As soon as he declared he would take less money for his wall, I knew then and there that I could give him zero and he’d be the one begging me. Trump would not have asked for less if he weren’t afraid on some level. Democrats must target that fear like a hunter to its prey.

This country doesn’t belong to Donald Trump or to the people who smile when they see a child gassed at the border. This country belongs to those who will tear the wall down and will see to it that those smiling faces are turned into ones of hopelessness. There’s only one true way to rid them of their happiness.

 

 

Advertisements


Categories: Democrats, Donald Trump, Opinion, Politics, The People's Interest

Tags: , , , , , , ,

3 replies

  1. Why are you against National Sovereignty and why do believe we owe non citizens anything? Even the time of day? If I were a border agent and someone asked me for the time of day, whether Canuck, Beaner, Bagel or Kebab, in my best Eric cartman I would say…”No! Did Kyle tell you to come here, or his NGOs?”

    I have gone over your reading list, and am genuinely surprised as the two Bernie Sanders Communist agendas are the only to not on my own. When he finished running is around the time the filthy, dirty, nasty, degenerate Atheist Plussers (need to shower after saying it) polluted and infected all atheist groups and took over. Naturally Americans with Toxic masculinity like myself, were the first to go. Next, those that understood biology like Dawkins and Harris. I didn’t leave the left, the left left me. Your reading list was mostly right leaning (now that the Overton window is just left of Lenin, Trotsky and Marx in a meeting at Synagog). Why are you still in a party that advocates removing the first and second amendment? You seem like a smart, good guy that should know communism has always failed, and no, that is not because it has never been tried correctly and no, you wouldn’t do it correctly. What we’ve got here is failure to communicate. Some Xirs you just can’t reach. So you get what we have here last week, which is the way Xir wants it. Well, Xir gets it. I don’t like it any more than you men.

    You should understand that the only way to achieve the left’s Utopian dream of equality for all, is in poverty. Not all cultures are equal. Genders are not equal. Morality is simply the survival instinct above the individual level. Thus, allowing your new voters to break the law in entering the US to help the genocide of European descendants for that one religion because you believe in the logical fallacy of “sins of the father” (a Jewish debt scheme to normalize the generationl hand down of debt and guilt to normalize debtors prisons, then normalize indentured servitude, then to normalize slavery.)

    What is the left’s big stance, big draw that kept you left when the slide to an anti-white stance? Do you think if the win and take over, you will be thanked for the self hatred and you won’t be oppressed? Are you so virtuous you are the only one that votes against their best self interest? Tell me why you would do that. I can’t figure you out.

    In 1965 before AIPAC guys (not Goys) authored, lobbied for and got passed the Immigration Act, we were of 90% European descent and were assured by (((them))) that it would not change our demographics. Why do you think (((they))) did that?

    Are you a Plusser or something? I won’t use the Genetic Fallacy (Fallacy of Origins, Fallacy of Virtue) because I am better than those that use fallacy in an argument. (humor) I am just genuinely curious on how we seem to have started at the same place, could have been hunting buddies or had beers at a strip bar…but instead, you ended up over to the left, and I slid right. Because promise of a woman’s affection is a strong draw if tempted by one who may have put you in the zone. In fact, it’s perhaps the only forgivable one, if she is an 8 or better.

    Like

    • First of all, I’d like to take the opportunity to thank you for taking the time to read my work and I’m impressed that your interest held long enough to skim my ‘About’ tab’s reading list. My personal favorites on that list are by Christopher Hitchens.

      I’m not against national sovereignty, I’m against forcing policies on the people who did not first provide a mandate. I’m a big fan of people getting what they vote for and highly against those isolated individuals who want to groove themselves into some kind of power so as to influence the outcome toward something undesirable for the whole. In other words, I do not want some asshole telling me I can’t eat the chocolate cake I voted for because he’s on a diet and feels anyone else who eats that cake somehow hurts him. I don’t buy into it and I actively eat the chocolate cake indignantly at any opportunity.

      I believe that we owe noncitizens who we have hurt with our international policies. My policy is if we break it, we buy it. We don’t just leave the store and pretend we didn’t do it. And I will point to specific policies upon request.

      I also want to illustrate that Communism is government owned means of production. Socialism is the public ownership of the means of production. Capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production.

      Nowhere in any of the Sanders books does it talk about a ‘communist agenda.’ However, Democratic Socialism is mentioned and it is just a fancy way of saying ‘we the people.’ This country was based on the progressively left idea of self representative government as opposed to a shitty monarchy of inbreds.

      An opportunity where the common person can change their stars- something our European ancestors were prohibited from enjoying.

      Second of all, there are some very weak people on both the left and the right that would like to see a very slanted first amendment. There’s no doubt about that. Does the whole Democratic party wish to do remove the first amendment or slant it in some way? No. We both know that’s not the case and there are many examples of people on both sides who work to protect it. Having said that, I don’t want you to get the impression that amendments are perfect. They aren’t. The case about the second amendment I’m trying to make and the Democratic party as a whole is trying to make is that there should be barriers for some people to get guns. I make no apologies about it. I don’t think someone who hears voices that aren’t there or sees people or objects that aren’t there should have access to a gun. I also don’t believe in allowing the blind to own a gun. And you bet your ass I believe a national registry is just as much about protecting someone from being wrongfully accused as it is to keep track of the flow of illegal weapons.

      Third of all, it isn’t so simple to say that genders aren’t equal. Have you ever looked at a human being and tried to look past gender? I have. I see organisms that have similar behaviors that are accented because of the genetic set that manifests. To say the genders are unequal is to ignore the fact of spacial dimension. To think in terms of gender equality is to buy into only one dimension of political and cultural space. And I’m merely pointing out there are multiple dimensions.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: