Apparently they were not aware that preventing your city from being sacked was immoral. But we live in more enlightened times now.
I’m sad as well, that so many people have allowed themselves to be conned by Donald Trump. I honestly feel bad for them.
What was the last city in the US that was sacked in the classical sense? Sherman's March to the Sea in 1864?
I noticed you couldn't come up with someone in Democratic leadership calling for the dismantling of barriers around border checkpoints. Not surprised. The rest of your response was simply BS to cover up your lie. Again, not surprised.
Anyone who doesn't agree with me is a racist, sexist, homophobe and I would feel bad for them if they weren't so deplorable. This furthers the conversation.
I noticed your answer to his original point (your ridiculous, vapid question) was typical goal post moving a liberal like yourself makes when they refuse to confront a simple premise. The rest of your response continues to be simple BS to cover up logical inconsistencies you and your allies make. Again, not surprised.
http://bbs.clutchfans.net/index.php?threads/breaking-trumps-wall.295110/page-49#post-12166457 OK, I've posted my challenge to him and his answer. Show where he responded to the question about Democratic leadership calling out for the removal of existing barricades around border checkpoints. Why don't you find a citation to quote? Should be easy between the two of you. Or post more of your BS. Since that is what trump supporters are left with. BS.
Nancy Pelosi stated "A wall is an immorality", (without explaining how or why). I tell you what, I'll start to look for your "quotes" the minute you FIRST define what walls are immoral and which ones aren't and how to distinguish. Should be easy for you or Nancy to define. Or post more of your BS. Since that is what trump derangement syndrome sufferers are left with. BS.
Yes, "ironically". And don't call me realistic because I think that you meant to say "coincidentally".
Our sarcasm today will be received wisdom of the not to distant future. Walls are immoral and sovereignty is a backwards concept. Thanks, Nancy.
Au contrare, I pointed out that all of those who have stated walls are immoral or ineffective are de facto saying current walls should be dismantled. Which you have not contradicted...not that you could. Not surprised...I never expected that you would. Typical that that thing you call BS is elsewhere known as 'logic'. But that this surpasses your cognitive abilities is no surprise. Also noted that you are calling out a lie where nothing even remotely close to that occurred. All par for the course...didn't expect any different. But, much better to continue debating/discussing with those more capable of doing so. If I want to listen to Democratic rhetoric I can always tune into CNN. So, ignored you should be, and ignored you are.
As did I...you utterly failed to respond (as to which walls are moral and which are immoral, and how you tell the difference). Not surprised...typical of your ilk. you know there's no answer to that, so the only response is to increase the rhetoric and call out the other side. Because they have no defense other than that. Funny, given your failure to answer a basic question except with more rhetoric. What 'Trump' supporters are left with, in this argument, is 1. Everything the Democrats have said about supporting a wall in the past (something else you failed to respond to...point noted, you accept your complete hypocrisy), and how it's all suddenly changed now, for no apparent reason. 2. Most things they are saying currently, especially in light of what they said previously. 3. The demonstrable effectiveness of the walls they have built. 4. No explanation or argument on how you control the border with no physical barrier. 5. No explanation on how their stance fly in the fact of common and standard security doctrine (first, provide physical security). All I did with my statement was point out the position their ludicrous stance puts them in. That you can't defend their position, except by cranking up the rhetoric, is on you, not on us.
Hello, 911? Yes, I'd like to report another case of TDS. Looks serious. Can you send someone over right away? Thanks.
It sounds like you agree that physical barriers in some contexts work. So, the idea of some fencing (or wall) shouldn't be immoral or wasteful or discriminatory. I get that it should be a more nuanced argument about where the barriers should be placed. But a lot of the posts appear to be just wall:good or wall:bad.
Where in your quote does Pelosi say to remove existing barriers around border check points? You keep flailing around. Where is the quote?
I've clearly posted my position on increasing border security. Increased use of technology, ie drones, surveillance, satellite imagery. Increased hiring of border patrol agents. Increased enforcement of hiring laws. And repair and reinforcement of existing barricades as needed. And working with Mexico and other countries to reduce the number of people that want to come to the United States. I've posted this numerous times.
In short, you support literally anything but extra barriers because orange man bad. Sounds about right.
