Jump to content

The Trump Shutdown


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

36 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

 

So, now that we've established that neither of you are interested in putting an end to modern human slavery and child sex trafficking; what do each of you feel is the acceptable amount of slavery and pedophilia we should have in America?

 

I am curious, does it physically hurt to be this stupid?

 

Both Logic and I have repeatedly given articles written by centrists and conservative sources that explain that a wall has no clear indication of preventing human slavery or child sex trafficking. Not "Orange Man bad!" rants, data and the opinions of people whose job it is to stop the things you claim that you wish to be stopped.

 

I don't approve of any amount. I don't speak for others, but I highly doubt that any of the people who you accuse of not being " interested in putting an end to modern human slavery and child sex trafficking" do either. It's just that we know that wasting money on a wall is going to do nothing to stop it, and takes away resources from things that actually could.

 

It would be like me saying, "You're against spending 5 billion to build the robots from Pacific Rim? It seems that you have no interest in stopping North Korea from obtaining nuclear weapons. How many nuclear weapons do you want North Korea to have?"

 

 

While having a giant fighting robot might make a part of me very happy, most people would call that a complete waste of time, money and sanity. 

 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

Both Logic and I have repeatedly given articles written by centrists and conservative sources that explain that a wall has no clear indication of preventing human slavery or child sex trafficking.

 

All done while ignoring and running away from the testimony and evidence presented (from the people who patrol the border) which counters your opinion. That doesn't make you noble. It makes you dishonest.

 

You're terrible at this.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

Both Logic and I have repeatedly given articles written by centrists and conservative sources that explain that a wall has no clear indication of preventing human slavery or child sex trafficking. Not "Orange Man bad!" rants, data and the opinions of people whose job it is to stop the things you claim that you wish to be stopped.

 

I'm not interested in op-eds written by "centrists or conservatives".  The wall isn't about the politics of the wall, it's about breaking up a multi-billion dollar a year slave trade industry which operates through our southern border.

 

The experts who spend their days actively fighting against this scourge state that building wall segments across potions of the border which are difficult to patrol, and far away from check points, will make it easier to combat by steering traffickers closer to areas which are more actively patrolled.

 

This is a fact that I'm not going to allow you to run from.

 

I don't approve of any amount. I don't speak for others, but I highly doubt that any of the people who you accuse of not being " interested in putting an end to modern human slavery and child sex trafficking" do either. It's just that we know that wasting money on a wall is going to do nothing to stop it, and takes away resources from things that actually could.

 

The wall, according to the people who actively fight against human trafficking, is a necessary component of fighting it in as effective a way of possible. 

 

You're insisting on conditions which, according to the experts, would make it less than as effective as possible, which means permitting a higher amount of human slaves and child sex traffickers into our country.  This implies you believe there is an acceptable amount of slavery and child rape in America balanced against cost.  I want you to articulate exactly how much child rape and slavery is acceptable to you, given your position requires it.

 

It would be like me saying, "You're against spending 5 billion to build the robots from Pacific Rim? It seems that you have no interest in stopping North Korea from obtaining nuclear weapons. How many nuclear weapons do you want North Korea to have?"



 

While having a giant fighting robot might make a part of me very happy, most people would call that a complete waste of time, money and sanity.

 

This is a combination of a strawman and reductio ad absurdum.

 

Two logical fallacies for the price of one.

 

I am curious, does it physically hurt to be this stupid?

 

As stupid as you're behaving in this thread?  I certainly hope so.

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BigMcD said:

Look at all you clowns so proud of his trolling skills. Says a lot. 

I can tell you've attempted to troll, albeit poorly, at one time or another.  Take the TDS goggles off for a moment and just look at the craftsmanship of this work

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, /dev/null said:

I can tell you've attempted to troll, albeit poorly, at one time or another.  Take the TDS goggles off for a moment and just look at the craftsmanship of this work

You're chasing a lost cause. Asking a Canadian to think is like asking Gleeful Gator not to shithispants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

You're chasing a lost cause. Asking a Canadian to think is like asking Gleeful Gator not to shithispants.

You are criticizing someone because they are Canadian and saying they are stupid because of that? That's seriously f'n stupid. 

 

What a complete idiot you are. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

Personally I think Trump blew it on this one.  It would have been better if he let her go.  And every day tweet "I'm here ready to negotiate.   Where's Waldo Pelosi?"

 

I think it's more effective for him to do that while she's only blocks away. Makes her look even more unreasonable and ridiculous.

2 hours ago, Tiberius said:

 

Wow, that was quick. The left usually doesn't go with the "PEOPLE ARE LITERALLY GOING TO DIE!!!11oneoneone" talking point for at least a week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

I'm not interested in op-eds written by "centrists or conservatives".  The wall isn't about the politics of the wall, it's about breaking up a multi-billion dollar a year slave trade industry which operates through our southern border.

 

The experts who spend their days actively fighting against this scourge state that building wall segments across potions of the border which are difficult to patrol, and far away from check points, will make it easier to combat by steering traffickers closer to areas which are more actively patrolled.

 

This is a fact that I'm not going to allow you to run from.

 

 

 

 

The wall, according to the people who actively fight against human trafficking, is a necessary component of fighting it in as effective a way of possible. 

 

You're insisting on conditions which, according to the experts, would make it less than as effective as possible, which means permitting a higher amount of human slaves and child sex traffickers into our country.  This implies you believe there is an acceptable amount of slavery and child rape in America balanced against cost.  I want you to articulate exactly how much child rape and slavery is acceptable to you, given your position requires it.

 

 

 

Again, here are the arguments from people who actually are in charge of preventing human trafficking. 

 

In which they negate the value of a wall to stop human trafficking.

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/border-patrol-officers-us-mexico-border-wall/

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/will-trump-s-border-wall-prevent-human-trafficking-experts-aren-n751466



But experts and even Trump’s own Department of Homeland Security said they are unable to guarantee that the wall would have any impact the rate of trafficking.

"That is a question I’ve been wrestling with," Dottie Laster, executive director of the Heidi Search Center in San Antonio, Texas, and a human trafficking expert, told NBC News. "I’ve been thinking about it daily, and the truth is I don’t know if it will curb it or not."

 

But you like to ignore them.

 

You stupid Mother *****.

 

As a quick note, the fantasies that you concoct while you stroke yourself do not count as evidence, so...come up with something better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

I think it's more effective for him to do that while she's only blocks away. Makes her look even more unreasonable and ridiculous.

 

Wow, that was quick. The left usually doesn't go with the "PEOPLE ARE LITERALLY GOING TO DIE!!!11oneoneone" talking point for at least a week.

Wow, it was quick because it was what normal people call "obvious." You Trumptards can't see it because your God is seen as flawless 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tiberius said:

Wow, it was quick because it was what normal people call "obvious." You Trumptards can't see it because your God is seen as flawless 

 

I must admit, I've never seen a more flawless candied yam than Trump.

  • Haha (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

Again, here are the arguments from people who actually are in charge of preventing human trafficking. 

 

In which they negate the value of a wall to stop human trafficking.

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/border-patrol-officers-us-mexico-border-wall/

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/will-trump-s-border-wall-prevent-human-trafficking-experts-aren-n751466

 

 

 

But you like to ignore them.

 

You stupid Mother *****.

 

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/apr/2/border-patrol-agents-back-trump-wall-survey-finds/

 

That's 89%, vs. 7% who don't think it will be effective.

 

Who's ignoring what now?

 

Now, onto your own articles:

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/border-patrol-officers-us-mexico-border-wall/

 

This agent may be in the 7% who think the wall will be ineffective, however he speaks of a continuous wall, in place of better staffing an technology.  You're creating a false choice, and a strawman.  Literally no one is arguing in favor of a continuous wall, and literally no one is arguing for a wall as a substitute.

 

The agent mentions, in the article in question, that physical barriers work as a deterrent by forcing people into areas more easily traversed.  The agent also mentions that smugglers seek out areas that remote, difficult to traverse, and are far from outposts making it difficult to patrol.

 

THAT'S WHERE THE WALLS ARE BEING CONSTRUCTED TO ACT AS PHYSICAL BARRIERS YOU ***** MORON. 

Edited by TakeYouToTasker
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/apr/2/border-patrol-agents-back-trump-wall-survey-finds/

 

That's 89%, vs. 7% who don't think it will be effective.

 

Who's ignoring what now?

Please spend more money on us! Government workers wanting more money spent on their agency? Well, who would of thought??? 

 

 

You are an idiot 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/apr/2/border-patrol-agents-back-trump-wall-survey-finds/

 

That's 89%, vs. 7% who don't think it will be effective.

 

Who's ignoring what now?

That's cute.

 

I didn't ask if Agent Uncle Jimmy ***** likes it. He and his SO are free to get into whatever "the brown people are raping me" fantasies that they like.

 

I asked if the people, the people the Trump administration has tasked with stopping human trafficking and sex trafficking think it will do jack.

 

The answer is no.

 

As an addendum: Your little article includes nothing on how effective a wall would be. At anything. 

 

*breaks out laughing*

 

Just to continue pointing out how stupid you are.

 

Oh my god, can you get out of a paper bag without dying of thirst? AHAHAHAHAHA

Edited by WhitewalkerInPhilly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Waiting for a Shutdown to End in Disaster/Aides on Capitol Hill fear that a dramatic government failure may be the only thing to force President Trump and the Democrats back to the table", from McKay Coppins:

The basic theory—explained to me between weary sighs and defeated shrugs—goes like this: Washington is at an impasse that looks increasingly unbreakable.... For a deal to shake loose in this environment, it may require a failure of government so dramatic, so shocking, as to galvanize public outrage and force the two parties back to the negotiating table.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...