Dacien, as Rushgeekgirl already pointed out, the 2006 Secure Fence Act was not about a wall. It was about far more efficient and reasonable border security measures, and specifically left the physical-barrier requirements up to the departments tasked with implementing it:
Your trying to claim that it’s hypocritical for Democrats to support the 2006 Secure Fence Act and oppose Trump’s ridiculous boondoggle of a supposedly impregnable wall is like arguing that it’s hypocritical to vote for funding NASA space programs while opposing a plan to construct a giant aluminum stepladder to the moon.
Those don’t support the idea that a majority of Democrats were in favor of anything like The Wall that Trump is proposing.
Try again.
For you guys wanting a cite for this, here we go:
That’s all that needs to be said about that. It leads to a fascinating definition of “truth”, once defined by Trump sycophant Kellyanne Conway as “alternative facts”.
You’re kidding, right?
Darien, don’t bother trying again. I don’t mind if you never post here again at all.
Who’s Darien?
Good one, Dippity-doo!
I don’t necessarily think it’s hypocritical, I just think that if we lived in a different timeline with some milquetoast GOP president asking for a few (comparatively) bucks for a wall, it wouldn’t even be a question. They’d just allow it. The fight is about standing up for their base, which means standing up to Trump. Which means a wall is “immoral” and bad and awful and all that sort of thing.
It’s the “truth” Trump pulls out of his ass. Some suckers will just lap it up without thinking.
This is purely nonsense, and you know it.
But the idea that what separates Trump from reasonable standards of behavior is that he is not “milquetoast” is clever and insidious, so props for that rhetorical kung-fu.
.
Oh, what separates Trump from reasonable standards of behavior is far from just simply not being “milquetoast”, and we all know it.
Here, try this: Replace “milquetoast” with “typical” or “normal”.
I’d called you out on dishonest tactics before, but not one so blatant.
The Wall was a new idea from Trump. No one else has ever been stupid enough to propose a border wall for our entire Southern border (beyond some cranks who had no power).
The Democrats have been against it since Trump proposed it, which means they’ve been against it as long as the concept has existed.
Again, you like to bend the truth to defend Trump policies–while claiming to be a non-Trump conservative.
I just happen to think Democrats wouldn’t think twice about a drop in the bucket for a border wall if it were any other normal president. That’s what I think. I think they oppose it so strongly that they’re willing to hang on to this stalemate (along with Trump) because Trump’s a boor and a heated enemy.
Here’s another source:
2) Completing 700 miles of pedestrian fencing along the border, which would require approximately 350 new miles of fencing.
It was introduced by none other than Chuck Shcumer, but ultimately died in Congress. This was in 2013.
So how come Republicans never gave him the funding in the 2 years they had control over both houses of Congress and the presidency?
Dems were never for the wall. They were willing to use it as a bargaining chip for DACA, but that’s all. Just stop with the revisionist garbage.
I’m not saying they were “for the wall”, I am saying they were in favor of border barriers in the past on multiple occasions. I just linked one example. So here comes the latest border barrier (fence/wall, whatever you want to call it), but this time it’s coming from Trump. And Democrats cannot be seen agreeing to his request, their base would crucify them. Which is to say nothing of how they personally do not want to give him any wins. So the government gets shut down over $5 billion. Not to absolve Trump of course, digging in his heels over such a ridiculous issue.
Examine your conflicting statements as bolded above.
And since you’re so interested in “truth” from a “pro-conservative angle,” answer the question I posed about why Republicans did not give the dipshit his wall funding (that Mexico was going to pay for) when they had the chance. For 2 years.
Okay, “On board with border barriers”.
“Democrats used to be on board with border barriers.”
About your question about Republicans, I have no idea. As far as I know, request for funding or pursuit of the wall took a backseat to the hilariously botched “Repeal and Replace” Obamacare and the Tax Plan. I certainly don’t think Republicans were opposed to it, but that would be speculation.
Try the FBI:
He’s trying to force the government to capitulate to his demands; it fits.
And still no answer to the question.
ETA: A dumb ass answer to the question. It’s supposedly a Republican priority. It’s not for Democrats to give it to them. It was within the power of Republicans to do that, and they didn’t. Chew on that for awhile.