Message Forum

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/01/25/gop-sure-looks-like-it-wants-punt-border-crisis-help-trump/

Marty,

Thanks for the tip. But I should have pretty ready access to my brother's car sometime in the future, especially now that he's almost ready to retire. I do appreciate your looking out for me though!!! YEE HAW!!!

01/25/24 12:27 PM

#28872

Sandra Spieker (Ringo)

Janalu,

Abbott will ignore the Supreme Court when it suits him. He will obey their decisions if they go along with his belief system and the GOP. Take abortion for example. As soon as their decision came down the laws were immediately put in place and by golly enforced!! But the border, not so much. Which leads me to this: If they solve it by coming together it no longer becomes a wedge issue to drive the voters to Trump. He (Trump) is calling the shots, not Abbott. The border is a crisis and will remain so, the GOP wants it that way.

The GOP sure looks like it wants to punt on border crisis to help Trump

A little-noticed social media post last week featured a lament from Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), the GOP’s lead negotiator on a potential immigration deal.

“Only in Washington is our southern border political gamesmanship instead of a national security crisis,” Lankford said.

It wasn’t clear whom Lankford was accusing of political gamesmanship. But it came amid a growing push from the right wing of his party, Donald Trump and his allies to kill a promising potential deal.

And a week later, Republicans have done a great job confirming that they won’t do anything on the border for one big reason: political expediency.

As The Post’s Tobi Raji, Theodoric Meyer and Leigh Ann Caldwell report, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Wednesday privately offered a dour prognosis for a deal that would unite border security measures with funding for Ukraine’s war effort. In doing so, McConnell pointed to Donald Trump’s apparent ascension as the presumptive GOP presidential nominee. (Trump, who won the New Hampshire primary on Tuesday, has called for Republicans to reject the bipartisan compromise.)

Punchbowl News and others also reported that McConnell specifically cited a desire not to “undermine” Trump and the fact that Trump would like to campaign on immigration in the 2024 election.

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) called it “appalling” that Trump “would communicate to Republican senators and congresspeople that he doesn’t want us to solve the border problem because he wants to blame [President] Biden for it.”

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) told USA Today: “Is it really better to have 10,000 people crossing a day illegally or 5,000? Clearly it’s 5,000. So somebody who is trying to defeat legislation, all in the name of running for office? That is irresponsible.”

It’s been clear for a while that the politics of this issue would be tough, especially in a GOP-controlled House which has balked at what senators like Lankford are negotiating. The public details of the deal are sparse so far, but key aspects include toughening rules for those who show up at the border to claim asylum. A sticking point has been how to handle parole for migrants to temporarily enter the United States.

But specifically citing Trump and his campaign takes things to another level. The objections don’t seem to just be about the difficulty in passing something or that it would be insufficient in stemming the flow at the border, but about how it would play politically. This from a party that has played up the immediacy of what it labeled a national security crisis at the border.

The shift also comes, notably, after McConnell and other top Republicans previously stressed the opportunity at hand — and the necessity to get something done now.

Senate Republicans last week actually pushed back when some of their GOP colleagues and conservative talkers suggested that legislation wasn’t necessary or that they should wait until Trump took office in a year.

Lankford called it “by far, the most conservative border security bill in four decades.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) called it a “historic moment” and assured the GOP that it “won’t” get a better deal with Trump as president. “To get this kind of border security without granting a pathway to citizenship is really unheard of,” Graham said.

The No. 2 Senate Republican, Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), offered similar comments, calling it a “unique moment” and arguing that there’s “absolutely no way” to get such a deal under Trump unless Republicans get a 60-seat, filibuster-proof majority.

McConnell himself maintained that even full GOP control of Washington wouldn’t work, because “we probably would not be able to get a single Democratic vote to pass” the deal.

“This is a unique opportunity to accomplish something in divided government,” McConnell said.

The logical extension of those comments is that Republicans might be giving up doing something significant on the border: If it’s not going to happen under Trump, and you’re not going to do it now, it’s not going to happen, period.

And by sticking their necks out in favor of the push for a deal, they have made it look even more like political gamesmanship rather than national security concerns killed the agreement. It’s becoming increasingly difficult to dispute that Trump and some Republicans see political value in continuing the border crisis and declining to cut a bipartisan deal that could help Biden politically. GOP lawmakers are now talking openly about that.

A comment I keep coming back to on this is one from Rep. Troy E. Nehls (R-Tex.), who just came out and said it early this month: “I’m not willing to do too damn much right now to help a Democrat and to help Joe Biden’s approval rating.”

One way to look at McConnell’s comments is just an acknowledgment of the political reality that it was going to be tough to pass. Why even have the Senate pass something that the House won’t — and in the process, make it clear the House killed a deal that could have helped at the border?

But another is that it’s just sheer exasperation with Trump and an attempt to lay the failure of the deal at his feet. This is a man who has relentlessly attacked McConnell, launching racist attacks at his wife and even seeming to suggestively point to McConnell’s demise. Yes, McConnell would appear to be capitulating to Trump after all that, but he’s also effectively blaming Trump.

While walking off the Senate floor on Thursday, McConnell was asked about Trump potentially killing the deal.

“It’s not anything new,” he replied.

01/25/24 01:51 PM

#28873

Abbott reminds me of George Wallace.

Trump reminds me of Huey Long...

01/25/24 05:28 PM

#28874

Bob Davidson

Lowell,

I see Trump and Long very differently: Huey was a politician's politician; Trump is the opposite, the ultimate anti-politician. The validity of your point is if you see Trump as a master manipulator, like Huey..

If you haven't read T. Harry Williams' biography of Huey, you'd probably find it fascinating, as I did.

If you are writng as a Democrat, I assume you think Abbott is like Wallace because you dislike them both and they were both paralyzed. I personally liked Abbott before he was a politician and when he was a state district judge, but don't think much of his policies. If you hve thought about it, I guess where you could see them as similar is that the way the were pretty cynical about pretending to have strong beliefs for politial gain.

01/26/24 08:00 AM

#28875

Bob, I didn't even think about the paralysis issue. Completely missed that connect.

Wallace flouted the fed's intervention in what he perceived was a State's issue...

Abbott (the State of Texas, rather) is doing the same thing...

Trump and Huey Long were/are both populists to a fault.

Susie and I were in New Orleans a few years ago and went to the Huey Long museum. He has always been fascinating to me...I think it was a museum, it may have just been an exibit.

01/26/24 08:01 AM

#28876

David Cordell

Sandra,

As I understand it, the proposed legislation would allow 5,000 per day. I recall Jeh Johnson, Obama's Secretary of Homeland Security, saying that 1,000 per day was a crisis.

There is no broken immigration system. There is a President of the United States who refuses to enforce the law. He is costing us bilions and billions of dollars, and it is not just in the year of the illegal immigration.

Biden is importing poverty. Who is hurt the most? Poor citizens who will have more competition for housing and jobs and whose schools will be, rather are already being overrun by non-English speaking students.

But all of us will pay for this.

Biden has been a disaster.

01/26/24 10:30 AM

#28877

Bob Davidson

Lowell,

The big difference between Wallace and Abbott defying the feds is that what Wallace was doing was violating the law (avoiding the issue of whether the whole standing in the schoolhouse door was total theatrics -- like in Mississippi with James Meredith and Ross Barnett and Bobby Kennedy) while Abbott is trying to get the Biden administration to follow the law. Segregation was illegal in the United States at the time Wallace pulled those antics -- separate but equal had been found to be unlawful in 1954. He was defying the law. Biden is the one who is refusing to enforce federal law now. The Supreme Court did not rule that Texas cannot put up the barriers; they merely invalidated a lower court injunction prohibiting the feds from interfering with the Texas barriers. That is hugely different.

When I was a kid in Louisiana, our grandparents' generation still felt passionately about Huey, like my Iowa relatives felt about FDR, loving or hating him. We lived near the Huey P. Long Bridge over the Mississippi River so I was curious about him and liked to listen to people talk. Before Huey, Louisiana was run by plutocrats who made sure the bulk of the people were treated like peons. Huey taxed the oil companies to pay for expanded public schools, free textbooks, paved roads, electricity and water in poor areas, flood control, hospitals, made LSU into a national university, and had that motto "every man a king." He also made himself rich through politics (like our current Democrat leadership), blatantly lied like Biden, stirred up all of the class and race resentment he could, and was totally cynical about his actions and policies. Lots of people in the state truly loved him.

One of my favorite Huey stories -- which the older generation of Louisianans my parents knew all seemed to love -- is how he got black niurses and doctors into the big state teaching hospital in Baton Rouge. The local civil rights leaders came to him and complained that the hospital wouldn't train black professionals -- Southern University in Baton Ruge was the separate but equal LSU, like Prairie View was to Texas A&M, and their students had to train at the rundown municipal hospital.. Huey essentially asked them if it was really important or if they were just bitching. When they explained why it mattered a lot, he told them he'd take care of it, but they wouldn't like how he did it and would appreciate it if they would complain loudly enough for the rednecks to hear. They agreed.

He led a tour of the national press of the showcase hospital, bragging about how it was state of the art and how he had personally moved Louisiana from the dark ages into the forefront of medical science. When they visited a segregated ward of black male patients, he pretended to be taken aback when he saw white nurses tending to them: he demanded of the hospital administrator, "Why in the hell do you have white women catering to a bunch of n----s?" The administrator tried to explain that they were a teaching hospital drawing from whites only schools and there weren't colored staff available, but Huey angrily cut him off, ordering him to find some or he'd find a new head of the hospital. "When I come back, I better not find another white person treating a damned n----, iincluding doctors, or you'll be out of a job."

Of course, the national press made a big deal about what a horrible racist he was, the hospital brought in the black professionals to train, the civil rights leaders thanked Huey and complained publicly about the rascism, and the worst element of rednecks was thrilled.

01/26/24 10:44 AM

#28878

Jan Alexander

David said. "As I understand it, the proposed legislation would allow 5,000 per day. "

I just saw this :

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) addresses reporters during a press conference on Wednesday, January 24, 2024 to discuss the border security bill being negotiated in the Senate. (Greg Nash)
He said the emerging Senate border deal "may" give a green light to letting up to " 5,000 migrants per day" into the country, and it provides an incentive to millions more people to stream across the border.
Cruz joined Republican Sens. Rick Scott (Fla.), Mike Lee (Utah), Ron Johnson (Wis.), Eric Schmitt (Mo.), Roger Marshall (Kan.) and Mike Braun (Ind.) at a press conference to pan the emerging deal.

The conservative senators acknowledged they haven’t seen all the details of the bill yet, but they’re confident they’ll hate whatever deal emerges.

------------------------------------------------------------

We should probably wait to see the final bill.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3648

This was an interesting summary web site

https://www.stilt.com/blog/2021/06/eagle-act/

----------------------------------------------------

My opinion only : Don’t get me wrong, I totally and absolutely get why there is so much frustration in the border states. I understand Abbott’s frustrations.. but I totally disagree with how he is handling it; dropping off buses of immigrants at midnight in cities with below freezing temps, in the middle of the street without any warning to city officials who say wish they were given notice to prepare accommodations for the people. You know the saying from Luke 6:31 and Matthew 7:12 , "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" . These peotple aren't pawns in a chess game.

However, I too would be screaming if I lived in a border town. This immigration issue has been going on for decades without resolve. I watched the Mexican Foreign Secretary Alicia Barcena last night , and the US has put more pressure on Mexico to step up to the plate. This is a multi country crisis with so many layers to be addressed . Ignoring the crisis has led to many immigrants being tortured ,raped and killed by the cartel..

I can’t remember where I heard it was going to take four years to just process the immigration applications we now have but if so that is a lot. And frankly, they said we should completely stop any more applicants at the border till we get those completed. I agree… how ?… tell everyone the border is closed … for now… some how… with out violence. They all get sent back to their countries and that is the conundrum .

Till then however, I just don’t see why republicans expect a shut down of any progress this year in Biden’s presidency to finally come up with a agreed immigration package . A whole year, wasted. It reminds me of the last year of Obama’s presidency when republicans refused to consider any nominee to the Supreme Court.

P.S. I hope , I can keep my mouth shut from now on...

01/26/24 12:45 PM

#28879

Sandra Spieker (Ringo)

David,

I am glad you have inside information and understand the "border deal". The search I did for it revealed nothing, other than from Ted Cruz's lips, which, let's face it, could just be a tad bit partisan. As far as I know there has been nothing published on any deal. It has been killed. So, if 5,000 is a "disaster" and 1,000 is also a disaster, then what is the right number per day? Zero? Complete isolationism, except for certaiin OK people like Meliania and her family?

Is it lawful to prevent Federal Border patrol agents access to the border?

Trump declaring Victor Orbon a "great leader" and a "strong man" is an impending disaster for America. Voting for someone with 91 indictments is a pending disaster. Trump's plans to get even with his political opponents after his relection is also a impending disaster, as are his plans to dismantle the FBI, Justice Department, IRS and the EPA. January 6th was just a warning.

01/26/24 12:56 PM

#28880

Bob,

Your stories are always interesting and full of 'tongue in cheek' Southern humor. It's the kind of humor I've heard all my life, as I have been in attendance around many a dinner table hearing similar discussions with the good ol' boys.

01/26/24 02:40 PM

#28881

Sandra,

I don't believe there is any legislation that says we HAVE to allow foreigners into our country. We usually allow about one million newcomers to enter every year. At least that was the trend for many years before Obama came to office. Obama let a large number of Muslims enter when he was in office and most of them settled in Minnesota and Michigan, if I remember correctly. Way back in 1924, our government closed the border for a period to allow all of the immigrants who had come here during the late 1800s and the early 1900s to assimilate. I say the border was closed, but a small trickle of people were stlll allowed to enter. So the border was not completely closed, but the widely held objective was to encourage assimilation, which was very, very important to keep America working toward a cohesively trending goal. We needed to be 'melded' for the benefit of us all; blended together as one people rather than to be different peoples living together.

The borders were opened again in 1963-64 to the capacity that I mentioned before, i.e., around one million new immigrants per year.

The main reason that the borders are wide open now, is because the Democrats want more power so as to basically render the Republicans powerless. They really want to eliminate us altogether, if truth be told.

Plus, the Democrats want to turn Texas blue!

As for isolationism, FDR was practicing isolationism at the time WWII was breaking out, not wanting us to get involved, even as Churchill was begging us to help out. However, once Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, he was forced to take us into the terrible war.

Isolationism is not necessarily a dirty word. The citizens as a whole should decide together how far to go getting involved in other nations' affairs. Hopefully, our legislators will convey our thoughts and wishes in their workings during Congressional sessions.

01/26/24 05:15 PM

#28882

Jan Alexander

Jananlu says , " The main reason that the borders are wide open now, is because the Democrats want more power so as to basically render the Republicans powerless. They really want to eliminate us altogether, if truth be told."

Oh please ,come now.. let's not get dramatic. that is only your own perception. We haven't stormed the capital, threatened judges and tried to kidnap and murder governors.. and hoarded guns... or worn gun holters on our hips like U.S. representative Boebert .

Ok, enough of me ...

01/26/24 07:10 PM

#28883

Jan,

It's not dramatic talk. It's truth. They can't stand that we are here trying to undo what they legislate. (But not everything they legislate) Just ask either Schumer or Pelosi. They will confirm it under their breath to their closest brethren, but not out loud. They WILL try to turn Texas blue over the next few years, and the reason is the same. They want to eliminate our voices so that they have total control. We irritate them no end.

You can google it, I'm sure, on select websites. (Just ask Joy Reid for those websites)

I'm not saying they want to eliminate us physically. No, no. They still want us to be working and contributing taxes, like serfs used to do. They would be hard pressed to figure out what to do among themselves without our tax moolah to manipulate towards everthing they dream up----FOR THE CHILDREN, dontcha know....

And they want us to stop raising cattle. They want us to eat tofu, eggs, carrots and bok choy. No dairy though.

However, I think they would like for us to go back to horse and buggy days, because cars are something they dislike immensely, so, I guess they don't mind horse farts too much. They want to encouage us to live in the "15 minute" cities, riding bicycles to and fro, or walking. They also don't want us to travel on planes anymore. Air travel emits too much carbon.

01/27/24 07:51 AM	#28884
Jan Alexander Janaluhuli, "they " might not make you eat tofu but maybe worms. 🙃

01/27/24 10:30 AM

#28885

Jan Alexander

Here is a "happy" story... to end my pontifications on..

I decided at Christmas to give a random person in service of sorts a hundred dollars. There is a policeman who always sits on my street around lunch time... and so I decided it would be him.. But for two weeks he wasn't there .... Then after Christmas , I was caught off guard when I saw his patrol car hiding out of view on a side street.. so I turned /whipped in rather quickly at a higher speed than usual. I then sat in my car looking for the money for a few minutes... and got out of the car and got into his sights quickly so he could see me.. I held my little envelope in my hand with both hands raised alittle so he could see my hands... Don't know why , but did. I am sure I looked stupid. Smiling , as I approached his passenger window , he rolled it down . I explained what I was doing and his eye's lit up . I said it was a hundred dollars and he said he wasn't sure he could take that large amount. I said , well it is five 20's... as if it would be OK , then.. He thought about it , as I threw the envelope at him , teasing.. Then I walked away, and skidded out of the parking lot into the street . I have front wheel drive and as i pulled into the street it really skidded or peeled out.. I chuckled , thinking , good grief ... He probably thought I was a looney old lady.. BUT it really made me feel good to give him the money...

01/27/24 12:34 PM

#28886

Jan,

That was very kind of you!

We always knew you had a loving, good heart.

I know of a couple of men who pick up the food tabs for policeman and military men and women they see in cafes and restaurants around our town. Sometimes the tab is paid while the folks are eating and they don't know of what has been done until the waitstaff tells them at the end of their meals. It's done anonymously out of sight.

Those guys are my quiet heroes. I appreciate and admire their deeds.

01/27/24 01:41 PM

#28887

Jan,

You said: "We haven't stormed the capital, threatened judges and tried to kidnap and murder governors"

You really should start watching Fox News where you'd learn the truth.

1) Jan. 6 was NOT an insurrection, it was a minor riot (unlike the HUNDREDS of NON-MINOR riots the summer of 2020, of which there have been NO repercussions that I know of - we now have a non-equal system of justice for the 2 sides of the aisle in case you haven't noticed) and the dozen or so or whatever number of people that caused damage to the Capitol should have been charged, punished and then they would have all been released by now. All the other "insurrectionists" did NOTHING wrong. They were let in by all-dressed-similarly-but-not-official-wear-so-as-to-disguise-who-they-were FEDERAL employees (on tape on FNC) - it really was like WalMart shoppers entering there or Six Flags. Capitol guards talking to the guests (many now felons) and directing them during their visit, oops I mean insurrection (all on tape).

2) Chuck Schumer and Maxine Waters have both publicly and on tape fomented violence & rioting by saying to go to the houses of judges or get in the faces of the MAGA crowd - that's criminal.

3) Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, in one of the innumerable hoaxes perpetrated on us by the far left and then aided & abetted by the Dem-loving, corrupt legacy media, pretended that she was fortunately saved from kidnapping by a bunch of crazy right-wingers. What happened IN REALITY is, kinda similar to the Smollett hoax, it was all carried out by more Federal Dem-loving employees in league with the rotten governor.

I suppose you could DuckDuckGo (i NEVER use Google anymore) that and find it all, I'm thinking. I heard and saw all that first on FNC - WHERE ELSE? WISE UP! I'm not going to bother looking on-line for all this truth.

You probably don't know about the tall guy (Dem-loving Federal employee outside the Capitol on Jan 6) who WAS trying to cause the crowd to start doing physical things, like storming it. Or the bomb (photographed) near a bush planted by another Dem-loving fool that didn't go off as intended - and was intended to be blamed on MAGA folks. On and on in perpetuity I guess...............

01/27/24 01:41 PM

#28888

Jan,

Thanks for giving money to the cop. I also can always use money.

01/27/24 04:38 PM

#28889

Jim,

When I suggest to someone that they google, I'm using google as a verb. Whichever search engine they choose to use is fine with me. What should I say? "Search engine it as you wish!!"

Nice to read your posts. We never know what we're gonna git with you--like a box of chocolates!

Did you get snow and ice at your house lately?

01/28/24 08:26 AM

#28890

In the Constitution of the United States, the term "invasion" refers to the entry of a country by a public enemy, making war 1. The Constitution gives power to Congress to provide for calling the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions 1. The Guarantee Clause’s second obligation is to protect states against invasion, which means a human invasion from a foreign country 2. Entry alone, which is trespass, is not sufficient to constitute an invasion 3.

01/28/24 05:17 PM

#28891

Marty Fulton

My bad. Chiefs win. Sweet.....

01/29/24 08:44 AM

#28892

Chris Derrington. Remember how RHS was built before (I think) there was air conditioning, or at least it was planned that way...Anyway, they had large glass windows along the hallway side of each classroom. There was a pole in each room, with which the windows were tilted open, or closed.

One day in class, I daydreamed looking up into the reflection of the tilted window and saw the reflection of Chris looking back at my gaze from the glass. We chuckled or laughed, or grinned at each other.

I basically never had a relationship with Chris other than every single time we saw each other, at reunions or around town, we would both look and point up, mimicking our Junior Hi gaze...and then grin or chuckle..

A small thing, but a good memory. RIP Chris.

01/29/24 03:28 PM

#28893

Sorry, it just doesn't get any better than this:

01/29/24 03:46 PM

#28894

OK, maybe it's not as good as "I've Got Tears in My Ears from Lying on My Back in My Bed While I Cry Over You", but if this guy keeps practicing, I think he'll be pretty good some day:

01/29/24 04:08 PM

#28895