Trump, Pelosi, the Wall, and the Government Shutdown

 

Arguments about the standoff between Nancy Pelosi and the Dems and Trump have gotten complex and passionate, something that would not be true if we were not in the first government shutdown ever called by a President.

Thoughts on the government shutdown-

Our president never lets compassion for his pawns (oops, people) get in the way of trying to make a deal.

Dems do not want to make a deal as long as the government is shutdown. They define the federal workers who are not being paid as ‘hostages’. I guess this makes Trump a terrorist. We don’t make deals with hostage-takers.

Thoughts about the wall-

The President wants $5.7 for the wall and has already spent over $7 b to get his way, because experts say that is the cost of the shutdown so far. People are upset with the Democrats and they are saying the Dems are being unreasonable and should take the newest deal on the table that offers the left a few tantalizing tidbits,

One, like a 3 year extension for some DACA young people.

What will happen after 3 more years in America, when these young folks, who have never lived in the country of their parents, or were too young when they left to remember it now, if they are deported to a land that is no longer their country?

Two, the President has offered to build the wall (barriers) in noncontiguous arrangements.

The Democrats do not want to pay for a wall at all. It is a symbol of our President’s racism and white supremacy (which he expresses all the time, although he says he doesn’t). MSNBC is showing a piece of film in which MLK is standing before the Berlin Wall and expressing his sorrow about any efforts towards separating humans from each other. MLK knew what walls were for.

So two reasons not to give in on the wall: because the President wants it for immoral reasons, and because the President has taken ‘hostages’.

Here’s another reason, the President is only concerned about getting reelected. This was his election promise and right wing media people like the scary-mean Ann Coulter are holding Trump’s feet to the fire, reminding him he will never get reelected if he doesn’t build the wall.

Trump’s New Deal

These are the things that Trump offered in his speech to America on 1.19.19. There are some things that Trump offered that people think will help at the Border

  1. 800 m. for immediate humanitarian aid (used how?)
  2. 805 m for improved drug technology at legal ports of entry
  3. Hiring 2,750 new border agents
  4. Hiring 75 more immigration judges to help with asylum backlog
  5. Installing a new system that allows minors to apply for asylum before they leave their home country (A pretty transparent way to end caravans but good for young people and children if they are granted asylum. However, will everyone just be turned down? Is this just a way to get this out of view of Americans)
  6. Steel barriers along 230 more miles of the border

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-major-announcement-today-humanitarian-crisis-southern-border-mexico-daca-deal/

Media begins to blame Nancy Pelosi for being stubborn when workers are suffering

The media is beginning to turn on Nancy Pelosi. They are upset that she turned down the deal before the American people even heard it.

They do not seem to give credence to the importance of ending the shutdown first. Are we now in a fight over ‘order of operations’?

The American people are also beginning to turn on Nancy Pelosi. They think she is being heartless to the federal workers who aren’t being paid and that she should be more flexible now that Trump has offered those tantalizing tidbits.

The Democrats in the House can pass all the legislation they want but they know that any of their passed bills are unlikely to be taken up in the Senate. Their power is limited by strong opposition. Winning the House was not winner-takes-all.

Democrats have planning they can do and investigations they can do put beyond run-of-the-mill House Resolutions the only other thing they control is the purse strings.

Democrats would not be in any hurry if it were not for the ‘hostages’. Trump may have no compassion, but Democrats do. Trump is pretty sure he can break the Democrats if things get bad enough for workers affected by the shutdown.

How much of this is just about power? Should Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats who just won control of the Congress allow themselves to be humbled? What negative effects could that have on the country? We already have spent two years without any checks and balances. Can Trump have a long-view strategy for sidelining the Dems in the House so he still has no checks and balances?

Is this just an arm wrestling match with a side show of unpaid workers looking on woefully from behind the President, directly appealing to their only hope, the Democrats’ to throw the match?

Is this really about the Southern Border at all? When did the Southern Border become a crisis that had to be solved right this very minute, the Republican way, with no input from the Democrats? The only reason this issue is front and center right now is because our President made it so and the right wing nuts will not let him back down. (Most people must agree that Ann Coulter and Steven Miller are wingnuts.) Ann Coulter is not even in our government. No one elected her or appointed her to any office in our government.

However, I believe that the Democrats will have to cave so people can go back to work. Otherwise we may never again be able to see Democrats as being the party with a heart, the party of ‘we the people’. If the Democrats let Trump win he may use this tactic over and over again and that is a risk we will have to take if public opinion gets any more negative.

Can Nancy Pelosi sell a cave-in to the newest Democrats and still keep the speakership? How?

Photo Credit: From a Google Image Search – Chester Energy and Policy

 

 

Secrecy is Powerful

Secretive nations get a lot of power from conducting their
business in the dark. Their citizens are not allowed to publicly criticize
the laws or policies or the tactics of their government in order to insure
privacy. Guests are not allowed free access to all or any locations within
these countries but are conducted on official visits to only the sites their
hosts wish them to see.
Such countries can let rumors circulate about the weapons they
stockpile, what technologies they have mastered and about their military
capabilities in general. It is almost impossible to establish whether these
rumors are true or not, although we always must believe the worst of the rumors
could possibly be true.
It puts the rest of the world on an unsteady footing with regard
to nations that maintain high levels of secrecy. There are plenty of questions
and very few answers.
Does Iran have nuclear weapons? Do they have a program to
produce nuclear weapons?
How large is North Korea’s nuclear arsenal?
Is Russia planning to restore the boundaries of the former USSR,
or is Putin’s goal world domination?
What goes on in China that we are not supposed to know about or
see? Are they just hiding their “failures”, are they hiding things we would
consider human rights violations? Do they worry that the Chinese people will
learn too much about how other nations are governed, or are they hiding
military build-up? (China has not been thought to have imperialist leanings
until its recent activities in the South China Seas and current objectives in
space exploration and settlement.)Has China surpassed us in computer science
and internet innovation or are they still basically dependent on the advances
made by other less secretive nations?
Whatever is going on, these four nations alone, Iran, Russia,
North Korea and China keep us in a state of nervous speculation and
apprehension because we are left to imagine what they might be up to and our
imagination probably is far worse than the reality.
However, it is entirely possible, and we all believe this, that
these nations enjoy keeping us guessing about whether or not war is imminent.
It gives them a sense of power and, in fact, it gives them some actual power
among the world’s nations.
So why don’t we do the same thing – why don’t we do as some suggest
and become a more isolationist, secretive nation with its lips sealed (by
loyalty or coercion)? For one thing America could never keep a secret about
anything. Even if we wanted to throw a surprise birthday party for our
President (OK, highly unlikely right now because of the GOP) the information would squish
out of a million different sources. If you have enjoyed freedom for a couple of
centuries it is irrepressible. Perhaps if we had to keep a military secret we
might be able to, but I doubt it. There would be some free thinker (or traitor)
who would spill the beans because s/he felt the policy was wrong.
The key differences between these nations who are able to
inspire dread through secrecy and America (and other nations like America) is
that these are all nations where citizen lack freedom of speech and other basic
human rights. These are nations where government carefully controls everything.
Transparency is not a goal of any of these nations. They are secretive because
they cannot allow their citizens to experience the freedom people have on much
of our tiny planet these days. Each nation has its own reasons for “protecting”
its citizens from outside influences, but the overall effect is the same.
Only by clamping down on every kind of media and controlling
interactions with people from freer cultures can these nations maintain control
over their oppressed people. If a sort of ersatz power is conferred by this
very secrecy then so much the better. It can be exploited. When someone
confronts your carefully controlled tyranny and threatens to expose it or to
end it you need only raise a fist, stamp a foot, threaten a nuke, real or
imagined, and the world, which basically treasures peace, and which has no way
to evaluate your actual strength, backs off. As people who respect the human
rights of others we also grudgingly accept the rights of other nations to rule
themselves as they see fit.

Alas, we cannot get that power of secrecy that authoritarian
nations are awarded without losing the things we value most. Freedom is a
relative thing, so we know that we don’t possess perfect freedom, but what we
do have should more than make up for losing the terrifying power of the threat levels
that we imagine to be present whenever there is a nation that maintains a level
of obfuscation that we do not.
By Nancy Brisson

Gut-Punched

Kennedy brothers; left to right John, Robert, Ted.Image via WikipediaI’m still reminiscing my way through True Compass by Edward (Ted) Kennedy. I’m knee deep in the Civil Right’s movement and the Vietnam War years are just revving up. Ted Kennedy knew Martin Luther King because they were contemporaries. We all owe MLK a lot. He could have advocated violence and that would have torn America up, but he didn’t. He stressed peaceful resistance. “Black” Americans bore the brunt of the white backlash, but his tactics allowed for a national mood of shock at the hatred and sympathy for the cause of civil rights that violence might not have produced. Then we lost Martin Luther King.

Then we lost Bobby Kennedy who had been successfully campaigning for the Democratic nomination for President. These were very bad days for America. Something was very wrong. Ted Kennedy, personally gut-punched for the second time in five years, describes how his life reeled out of control for several years. It it difficult to imagine the pain in his life. His brother Joe, dead in World War II, his sister Kick, dead in an accident, his dad unable to communicate due to a stroke, Jack, assassinated and now Bobby, also assassinated. How does one family absorb all of this. And we know there was more to come. Although Senator Kennedy discusses Chappaquiddick he maintains that it was an innocent accident and one that he never, ever got over. He is gone now and that is the last word on that.

Enhanced by Zemanta