Shut her down boys, shut her down.

[churchmouse]

Well, I like to go to National Parks, but those are closed because they're "unessential".

I get that part. But essentially.....() they are essential for the public to use. So who/what decides what is actually essential.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Well, I like to go to National Parks, but those are closed because they're "unessential".

As do I. Better resolution would be to give feds less control over **** like that. Why should they be in control of a forest? Call it a “National Park” but running it with federal employees is a bit much imo. Maybe federal resources should be better used on international issues, instead of forests and tourist attractions.

 

[bwframe]

Looks like national park goers aren't missing much?

This article says national parks are not closed.

https://www.idsnews.com/article/201..._medium=email&utm_campaign=article-email-link


...Like the last shutdown, national parks and public lands are supposed to remain open, although not necessarily staffed...

 

[JettaKnight]

As do I. Better resolution would be to give feds less control over **** like that. Why should they be in control of a forest? Call it a “National Park” but running it with federal employees is a bit much imo. Maybe federal resources should be better used on international issues, instead of forests and tourist attractions.

I dunno. Talk to Teddy Roosevelt about that one.

Looks like national park goers aren't missing much?

This article says national parks are not closed.

https://www.idsnews.com/article/201..._medium=email&utm_campaign=article-email-link


...Like the last shutdown, national parks and public lands are supposed to remain open, although not necessarily staffed...

Some are open, some are closed (e.g. Smithsonian), some are filling up with trash, some are out of toilet paper.
https://www.npr.org/2019/01/02/681535260/how-the-government-shutdown-is-affecting-national-parks
https://www.npr.org/2018/12/29/6807...al-government-shutdown-drags-on-into-new-year
https://www.npr.org/2018/12/28/6807...ring-the-shutdown-their-bathrooms-not-so-much

 

[spencer rifle]

Looks like national park goers aren't missing much?

This article says national parks are not closed.

https://www.idsnews.com/article/201..._medium=email&utm_campaign=article-email-link


...Like the last shutdown, national parks and public lands are supposed to remain open, although not necessarily staffed...

This. Our family was on a week-long backpacking trip on the AT in Shenandoah National Park last shutdown. We had plenty of food with us (my wife was convinced that each of us needed 3000 calories every day), which became important to other hikers. Since they could not resupply at the closed camp stores along the trail, they would have to hike down off the ridge to nearby towns to resupply. We helped more than one hiker avoid this by giving them some of our food (trail magic!).

Besides the closed camp stores, the Big Meadows lodge was closed - we had planned our last night there to rest and get cleaned up. The road gates were closed, but we finally found a ranger that told us that hikers on the AT would not be kicked out and their vehicles would not be towed. Halfway through our hike we met a girl (trail name Clover) in a parking lot that was supposed to start a gov job but now had nowhere to go. She was about to drive off when we asked if she wanted to hike with us. She said she had all her gear but no food. We had that covered and she joined our last few days of hike.

It was very strange to see no cars on the Blue Ridge Parkway, just blowing leaves.

When we reached Big Meadows, the lodge and store were closed, but the big outdoor cooler was not. The food would go bad before long, so we left $ there and gorged on 1000 calorie giant muffins. Three rangers watched us for a while, and I went to talk to them. They said if we were done hiking, they would give us the gate combination and we could leave. We took Clover back to her car and left for home.

So some parts of the park were shut down and some were not.

 

[bwframe]

It's not like Obama did then, closing all national parks just for spite?

 

[hoosierdoc]

This press conference is gold. Just started watching on YouTube

 

[caverjamie]

This is embarrassing. It's not saving us any money, all we're doing is taking a crap on federal workers. I don't know if the wall is worth the 5 billion or not, but Trump campaigned on a wall and he got elected, so I'm not going to fault him for demanding his wall. But he, Pelosi, and Schumer have a duty to negotiate some kind of agreement. If he wants a wall, there has to be something the dems want that he can agree to. If they're not making a good faith effort to negotiate, I fault both sides.

 

[hoosierdoc]

Dems won’t cave.

How do you find find a middle ground on abortion for instance?

 

[jamil]

Dems won’t cave.

How do you find find a middle ground on abortion for instance?

Middle ground on abortion, for example, is pretty easy where most people are concerned. It takes two sides which won’t compromise, to make a stand-off. Most people think that first trimester is fine. Thereafter, the rules get more stringent. 3rd trimester, prohibit unless the mother’s life is in danger.

As it pertains to the wall, you’re right, the dems won’t compromise, because it’s not about the moral or fiscal consequences, or even efficacy of building a wall. It’s about denying Trump from delivering on the foremost campaign promise in 2016. They can’t let Trump claim that victory. I think they view it as existential.

 

[hoosierdoc]

Do you have data for “most people think first trimester is fine”? I certainly don’t. I don’t know many who think life magically begins at midnight after week 12. If they do, then they believe complete arbitrary nonsense. If they don’t but just agree to that cut off then they are fine killing babies, just will debate how old you’re allowed to kill them.

a middle ground of compromise for me is outlaw it in every instance except rape. And sorry, you are killing a life, so you need to name an accuser and report the rape.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Do you have data for “most people think first trimester is fine”? I certainly don’t. I don’t know many who think life magically begins at midnight after week 12. If they do, then they believe complete arbitrary nonsense. If they don’t but just agree to that cut off then they are fine killing babies, just will debate how old you’re allowed to kill them.

Life begins when the government says it begins, and ends when they say it ends. Apply purple... kinda.

 

[terrehautian]

How does they determine when you’re dead? When you have no heartbeat (and vote Democrat/purple). Our current bun in the oven had a heartbeat at 9 weeks.

 

[bwframe]

Do you have data for “most people think first trimester is fine”? I certainly don’t. I don’t know many who think life magically begins at midnight after week 12. If they do, then they believe complete arbitrary nonsense. If they don’t but just agree to that cut off then they are fine killing babies, just will debate how old you’re allowed to kill them.

a middle ground of compromise for me is outlaw it in every instance except rape. And sorry, you are killing a life, so you need to name an accuser and report the rape.

 

[KG1]

Middle ground on abortion, for example, is pretty easy where most people are concerned. It takes two sides which won’t compromise, to make a stand-off. Most people think that first trimester is fine. Thereafter, the rules get more stringent. 3rd trimester, prohibit unless the mother’s life is in danger.

As it pertains to the wall, you’re right, the dems won’t compromise, because it’s not about the moral or fiscal consequences, or even efficacy of building a wall. It’s about denying Trump from delivering on the foremost campaign promise in 2016. They can’t let Trump claim that victory. I think they view it as existential.

Bingo on the wall assessment. The money is a drop in the big picture bucket and the immorality of a wall argument that Pelosi keeps trying to push is absurd.

Is what we currently have immoral as well?

What level of border security besides having nothing would pass the morality test?

 

[Kutnupe14]

This is embarrassing. It's not saving us any money, all we're doing is taking a crap on federal workers. I don't know if the wall is worth the 5 billion or not, but Trump campaigned on a wall and he got elected, so I'm not going to fault him for demanding his wall. But he, Pelosi, and Schumer have a duty to negotiate some kind of agreement. If he wants a wall, there has to be something the dems want that he can agree to. If they're not making a good faith effort to negotiate, I fault both sides.

For clarification, he campaigned on a wall that Mexico was supposed to pay for.

 

[jamil]

Do you have data for “most people think first trimester is fine”? I certainly don’t. I don’t know many who think life magically begins at midnight after week 12. If they do, then they believe complete arbitrary nonsense. If they don’t but just agree to that cut off then they are fine killing babies, just will debate how old you’re allowed to kill them.

a middle ground of compromise for me is outlaw it in every instance except rape. And sorry, you are killing a life, so you need to name an accuser and report the rape.

A position on abortion could possibly be further right wing than that, but not much. So it does not surprise me that you'd say that your "compromise" is outright ban except in cases of rape. That's pretty close to the right's absolutist position. The far other side has an absolutist position too: Unrestricted on-demand abortions any time during the pregnancy, from conception up to birth. America does not support either absolute according to polls. Most people oppose abortions personally, but don't want them to be illegal. Pretty much they support fewer restrictions on first trimester abortions, then only in cases where the mother's life is at risk after that.

And that's the thing which is pertinent to this discussion. Most absolutist views are held by people on the far left or far right. Democrats in congress are thinking about the wall strategically, not really all that ideologically (except for the bat-**** crazy ones like the notorious AOC). If Trump gets his wall, his base will be more solid going into 2020.

The ideological absolutist position for the progressives is no borders. The right's absolutist position is to allow no immigration at all. Both positions are pretty radical. But I'd say the left supports their absolutist position more than the right does. Alt-right/white nationalist types are the few on the right who seem to support the absolutist position against immigration.

The more common position on the right and the center, is to secure the borders and allow legal immigration of law abiding, productive people, who mostly share America's founding values. I think I've read that this position is held by a majority of people. So the Democrats, as they try to make a moral case against the wall, are going against what most Americans want. Not that they want a wall, but that they don't think the moral case for open boarders is a good one.

 

[jamil]

Well, if you're far right I suppose.

 

[caverjamie]

For clarification, he campaigned on a wall that Mexico was supposed to pay for.

He did say that didn't he...I'm shocked that an elected official lied to me. (not really) What I find interesting, is that he is still pushing this wall/fence hard - whereas he said other things during his campaign that he dropped like a hot potato. Investigation of Hillary Clinton is what came to mind. "lock her up" and all that... You would think the stuff about the wall was similar, hot button topics to get himself elected. Why does he give two flips about a wall now? He can't give it up or he'll be perceived as a loser? Or maybe he has decided border security, fences, walls, etc. is an area that needs attention - something he needs to do something about.

I don't know. Regardless of his reason, 5 billion is play money for this government. We can afford to waste it - in fact we can blow 5 billion on the wall and another 5 billion on some pet projects for the dems. Let's spend 5 billion in resettlement for the folks that have made it across the border. I swear though, congress and the senate shouldn't be paid during a federal government shutdown either.

 

[jamil]

For clarification, he campaigned on a wall that Mexico was supposed to pay for.

I don't think anyone actually took that seriously. If Trump gets funding for the wall, he'll end up getting full credit for the promise. I think that's why dems are so desperate to block it. That is the #1 thing on the agenda of Trump voters from what the polling says, and it's validated from personal experience. Trump started talking about ending illegal immigration and the people from all sides who thought illegal immigration was bad for the country jumped on the Trump train. Lot of working class union members broke with the dems to vote for Trump just for that issue. They don't give a **** if Mexico pays for it, though I'm sure they'd find it amusing if Trump impossibly pulled it off. They give way more ****s that the wall gets built.