Swill Merchant

As a % of your respective annual incomes, your door costs more than the wall.

I can get into your house with my bare hands, but I bet you still lock your doors and windows.

Halfway through the second season I stopped caring.

People who lived in EJ's house shouldn't throw stones.

Would we not patrol the border in the absence of a wall? It seems a wall would reduce the cost of patrolling. And maintenance costs would be far less than the cost of construction.

I'm sure those people are out there. As GWB said on South Park, 25% of the country is retarded. But no serious person thinks the wall is a cure-all or that it immediately halts all drug trafficking and illegal immigration. It's a tool to help secure and manage the border so as to reduce those things. The level of effectiveness remains to be seen, but it will certainly assist the border patrol in meaningful ways. Even if it didn't, it's really not a big deal as the relative cost is minimal. it would be the equivalent of the average guy blowing $100. Who wouldn't blow $100 to keep the peace in their house, even if they thought it was a waste? I blow $100 on useless junk every Valentine's day for that very purpose. I believe the humanitarian argument favors the wall. If we can control the border we can reduce the exploitation & trafficking of children, and regulate legal immigration more effectively. There are better and less arbitrary ways of giving assistance to people in need around the world than leaving a porous border that encourages people to make a dangerous journey for the promise of America.

In actuality, the beauty of the plan is its simplicity. Once a plan becomes too complex everything can go wrong. I'm not doubting you've heard people claim a wall will cure all ills, but I don't know of any.

We should take no steps to reduce pollution until and unless someone presents a cheap and effective plan that eliminates polution in its entirety.

Don't forget the kitchen sink.

He's projecting.

This is a red herring. Whenever you see this argument used wrt the southern border you know the person is concealing his real agenda and selling you something he thinks you're more likely to buy.

You want elements of both, lest you become one dimensional. But if I'm building around Josh Allen I prioritize speed and pass blocking OL to take advantage of his strengths. Allen's best assets are his arm strength and running ability. Deep routes obviously take longer to develop than quick-strike intermediate and short routes. They also spread out the defense (especially when your QB can throw a 50 yard strike on a rope) which opens up running opportunities. I'd also prioritize speed and hands in a RB so that he may take advantage of the space created by the spread out defense. I realize big, physical, conservative, ball-control oriented offenses are generally preferred by defensive-minded coaches, but if Josh Allen is your QB of the future, build an offense that exploits the mismatches he creates.

That Newsroom clip is intellectually vacant and easily broken down. It is devoid of substance. The funniest thing about lefties posting it is that it makes the now racist claim that America was great at some point in the past but has since declined. Hence the need to make America great again.

Obviously wins and playoffs would be great, but if Josh Allen solidifies himself as a franchise QB I'll be satisfied regardless of whether we see the postseason. That's when FAs with options want to play for you, current players want to re-sign, & imaginations run wild with possibilities.

Terry McClinton

There should be a meme with a parrot warning us that the President will lie tonight.

Remember when Judd Apatow said black men assault women and then try to silence them? https://people.com/crime/celebrities-react-to-bill-cosby-sexual-assault-charge/

This Tiberius fellow seems to have a contentious relationship with the truth.

Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence.

Maybe they have some old tweets up their sleeve.

No serious person accepts this position. $5b is a large sum for a major corporation, and a tremendous amount for a private company, but it's minor expenditure to the federal government. The financial argument against the wall is incredibly weak.

It's a point that's not strong enough to warrant serious rebuttal. If I understand you correctly, and please correct me if I'm wrong, your argument is that if much of the wall has been built, and we still have immigration issues, then the wall doesn't work. That's equivalent to: If much of the dam has been built, but the river still flows, dams don't work.

The argument is a logical fallacy. It's a statement that President Trump says x & y, therefore if y isn't true then x is false. x is not a function of y. Furthermore, the falsity of y has yet to be established.