Gee, a President lied to get elected? I'm shocked, shocked!

Short of getting us into a war with North Korea (which I guess is still a possibility), Trump can't possibly do as much damage as Clinton would be guaranteed to do if she ever got a Democratic majority in Congress. Or, for that matter, as much damage as any other President to take office this century has already done. Good enough for me. Any swamp drainage he manages to accomplish is pure gravy.

When ever liberals bring up the stupidity of the wall I ask them were they were in 2012 when Obama spent more building up that wall than the 5 presidents before him combined.

If they are from California I ask them why they have never once protested to take down the section of border wall Clinton gave the state in the 90s

If they were old enough, they could remember the amnesty in 1986. There were around 2 million illegal immigrants. The statements at the time were: we can't possibly deport that many people. So we'll grant them amnesty, and then close the border for real.

Those of us with some sense of reality asked: Why don't you close the border first, show that you can actually do that? Because the amnesty is going to draw more illegal immigrants than ever.

Of course, that didn't happen. They granted the amnesty, but never closed the border. So now we have 20 million illegals.

Build the damned wall, I don't care who pays for it. Then start the mass deportations.

The army is checking out new jet packs. They expect the priced to come down to about $600 each within a year or two. How much good will that wall do?

Will Mexico pay for the wall? Of course not!

Remittances from Mexicans living in the US, legally and illegally, have overtaken oil revenue as the largest source of foreign currency for the Mexican government.

Part of that is because the Mexican economy has diversified since the passage of NAFTA and partly because global oil prices have fallen. In 2014, oil exports made up 80% of the Mexican government's foreign revenue; today, they make up about 20%. Manufacturing exports and tourism are the other two main sources of foreign revenue for the Mexican government.

These remittances represent a massive (an estimated $25 billion in 2014) tax-free transfer of wealth out of the US. "Essentially, Mexico's most lucrative natural resources are the people who leave home."

Gee, a president can't levy taxes, or spend money without Congressional action?

Who knew?

Will Mexico pay for the wall? Of course not!

Remittances from Mexicans living in the US, legally and illegally

So you lay on a 10% tax on remittances. A year or two of that, and *poof* you've paid for the wall. QEF'ND

As heaving torrents of water surge ever higher to lash the Lone Star coast, Texans huddle comfortably in candlelight, certain that their magnetic and respected Chief Executive stands in competent readiness to assist with relief and reconstruction.

Or, they're peeing their pants.

So you lay on a 10% tax on remittances. A year or two of that, and *poof* you've paid for the wall. QEF'ND ~ I R A Darth Aggie at August 25, 2017 6:01 AM

You're okay with the government arbitrarily deciding how someone can use the money he earned; double-taxing the money someone earns just because it's the other guy (for now)? How about when foreign countries reciprocate by taxing remittances to the US and US citizens working overseas have to pay additional taxes to send money home to their families?

How about when you take your own money on a trip to a foreign country? Will you happily pay remittance taxes on that?

Taxes reduce remittances (taxes always reduce the activity taxed). Tax them too much and you risk bankrupting the Mexican economy; leaving a broke and angry country sitting just south of the US. If you think illegal immigration is a problem today, just wait until the only way for average Mexicans to get US dollars is to be in the US.

Remittance taxes are also difficult to enforce. If I can't wire the money, I can always ship a box of cash. Or send a check. Or travel carrying the cash.

Oklahoma taxes foreign remittances at $5 for the first $500 and 1% after that. Wonder how many immigrants in Oklahoma living near the border go to Texas, Arkansas, or Kansas to remit money.

How willingly do you think immigrants living here will pay the remittance taxes to build a wall to keep their friends and relatives out?

Will you tax only remittances to Mexico? Or will remittances to all countries be taxed? And will those remittances be used to pay for a wall between the US and Mexico?

What effect will remittance taxes and their consequences have on foreign investment? On US investment in foreign countries?

Taxing remittances could work, but one has to consider the ramifications.

I didnt believe a single campain promise that Trump made.

I believed all of Hillary 's. :-)

Mexico is a lawless narco state. We need to get control of the border.

And that is Crid in a nutshell. Waiting for the magic man or pissing yourself in fear? Why the hell would you do either? Storms like this are a pretty normal thing around here. You just make sure the cupboard is full and don't skimp on the vodka. At worst you have a day or two off from work due to flooding and power outages.

And back on topic, yeah! Who actually believed that wall thing? Sure you shout it out at a political rally. But it was more like shouting 'Freebird' at a concert. Which incidentally people also shout at operas and classical venues. It is more of a joke and an emotional outburst than a serious request.

"Build the damned wall, I don't care who pays for it. Then start the mass deportations."

What's the good of a wall when it can be foiled by a ladder?

You want to get rid of the illegals? Put some teeth in the existing laws and jail the employers. Make it a felony to aid and abet an illegal and start putting these 'sanctuary city' people in federal prison.

Ban sending remittances, don't allow their children in public schools or provide any welfare or medical assistance. Cut them off of Uncle Sugar's money.

I don't think a wall is going to that effective, anyway. Cartels know how to tunnel.

Texas is prepared for the storms, Crid. Emergency crews and equipment have already been moved into place; shelters in San Antonio its northern suburbs are prepared to take in people evacuating from the coastal areas. Our state government tends to do a good job in this type of situation, and people here aren't helpless. We're not Louisiana.

Is Louisiana going to get hit much Ahw? I haven't had the energy to worry about other states. But if they get flooded out it may be another boon for the restaurant scene here in Houston. They have some great chefs and once people escape from Louisiana they often don't go back.

No, I don't think Louisiana will get hit, Ben. I believe the current forecasts are that the storm will reach land near Corpus Christi.
I was only using Louisiana as an example of inept state and local government emergency preparedness.

"I don't think a wall is going to that effective, anyway. Cartels know how to tunnel."

The more difficult and expensive you make it to move back and forth across the border, the fewer illegals will even attempt it.

I dont think a million people a year are going to be able or willing to pay the cartels to use their tunnels.

Cutting the flow of illegal immigration in half will make it that much easier to detect and deport the ones already here.

> And that is Crid in a nutshell.

I'm in a nutshell! No, the important thing is that you children can never be held accountable for the reprehensible diminution of expectations have for their government: Not international affairs, border control, regulation & revenue, enforcement... Basically you twerpy little Trumpsters are scot-free, because no one was ever going to count on you for clarity or performance anyway. So everything's going great.

Shine on!

Jen: "The army is checking out new jet packs. They expect the priced to come down to about $600 each within a year or two. How much good will that wall do?"

You're kidding, right? Or do you think if a wall is built the 1.2 million a year who enter the U.S. illegally will buy jet packs and fly over it? Now that would be something see. I suppose the Border Patrol would have to get jet packs too to chase them. I'd favor building the wall just to see that.

I was only using Louisiana as an example of inept state and local government emergency preparedness. ~ ahw at August 25, 2017 8:44 AM

Louisiana is also an example of inept individual preparedness. People climbed onto their roofs and waited for the government to help them. Very few in New Orleans had a supply of food and water or any type of preparedness supplies laid in. Very few had an evacuation route mapped out or a plan in place.

My wife and kept a supply of food, water, and other supplies on hand when we lived in California for earthquakes. Never had to use them, but we were prepared. We don't live in earthquake or hurricane country now, but we still have emergency supplies and an evacuation route. It's called being responsible for your own safety.

"Louisiana is also an example of inept individual preparedness."-Conan the Grammarian
*
Oh, absolutely.

Suppose I thought there were too many illegal immigrants in the country and too many new ones crossing the southern border, and it needed to be stopped.

Suppose there was a presidential election coming up.

Suppose the grown-up, reasonable, mature candidate with lots of experience working in government favored granting amnesty to illegal immigrants and fast tracking them to citizenship.

Suppose the lying, narcissistic, pussy-grabbing candidate said round 'em up and ship 'em out, and build a wall and make Mexico pay for it.

Suppose I didn't think either candidate would have the ability to do exactly what they promise.

Which candidate do you think will come closer to doing what I want?

There was an expectation that the Congressional GOP would realize that they needed to appease about 60% of their voters who are in the group that would support him to the end.

From the policy paper put out during the campaign, the expectation was a 10% tax on remittances to Mexico.

The unexpected action is that the Congressional GOP is OK with returning to the role they played well for 40 years of perpetual loser.

Mitt Romney was unelectable; Donald Trump was electable; the Congressional GOP hasn't just lied, they have no interest in advancing any portion of the GOP agenda. The GOP is over as a party.

You're okay with the government arbitrarily deciding how someone can use the money he earned;

I've given in and taken a page out of the Left's playbook. That I'm doing that against one of their favored groups (undocumented workers) is just icing on the cake.

Besides, how many illegals are sending money back home? the people who are not permitted to work, and do not have taxpayer IDs. So, they're either not paying income tax, or they're committing identity theft and paying taxes, or more likely committing identity theft and committing tax fraud via the earned income credit.

That right there is adequate reason for we, the US taxpayer to fund the damn wall.

What's the good of a wall when it can be foiled by a ladder?

Shall we ask the Israelis? I do like the rest of your suggestions, Jojo.

Other presidential remarks:

If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.

A family of four will see a decrease in premiums of $2,500 per year.

Didn't really care who was paying for it - I wanted a wall. Hillary and the D's certainly weren't going to build it. Tax remittances. The permanent state always likes new taxes.

Louisiana is also an example of inept individual preparedness.

Except for that one dude who used his heavy equipment to build a berm around his house and out buildings (and heavy equipment) to keep the flood out.

Also, these guys

http://www.nola.com/news/baton-rouge/index.ssf/2016/08/louisiana_flooding_cajun_navy.html

Remember: if you are on the scene, you are a first responder.

"Shine on!"

Will do Cridster. Will do!

"I suppose the Border Patrol would have to get jet packs too to chase them."

Naw. It's called skeet shooting.

"Louisiana is also an example of inept individual preparedness."

It is a way of life over there. I have a friend who grew up over there. They had a dresser draw of weed that was a take as you feel bin. One point his mom got involved in running illegal gambling for the mob. They came in and installed one of those speak-easy doors at their house. You know the ones with the little slidey windows. One day the police raided the house and took everything out. The next day the real police raided the house and there was nothing to find. Corruption and graft aren't just for the big boys. Over there everyone seems to have a scam to run.

Trust me IRA, the cajuns are no different from the rest of them. Finding one or two exceptions doesn't change the massive general trend.

I'm still amazed that grown-ass adults believed all the campaign bluster.

Pretty much says it all. And they respond to it with — surprise — more bluster.

Pretty much says it all. And they respond to it with — surprise — more bluster.

Kevin at August 25, 2017 11:58 AM

I do not think this word means what you think it means.

Besides, how many illegals are sending money back home? ~ I R A Darth Aggie at August 25, 2017 10:48 AM

Well,let's see, the average remittance is a few cents over $300. And Mexico makes more money from remittances than from oil exports or manufacturing exports, $24.8 billion in 2015. That's a lot of remittances.

I like the part where HIllary isn't President.

"Or, theyre peeing their pants"

Snort. Most coastal peeps arent even evacuating. Yeah, traffics crappier on I35 today, but most-like my inlaws-bought some water and dug out the old flashlights.

Im chilling in a (full, no more appointments available) salon in a big shopping center doing plenty of not-storm-related business. No wet pants in sight.

As to the wall-either we eliminate all welfare, establish criminal penalties for employing illegals that we actually enforce, and let nature take its course....or, we find a way to control who comes here. Few have the stomach for the first solution. So, lets try a wall-whoever pays for it.

And as to Amys indignatuon at his lie.....A lying politician?!?! The SHOCK!!!!

I assumed, as I think did many Trump supporters, that he would try to do as many of the things he promised as he could remember with his short attention span and as Congress would go along with, given their mob mentality. He is no different in making absurd promises as any other politician. What IS remarkable is how many regulations he has rolled back, as promised, and how many good judges he has appointed. Oh, and he has kept mocking the media, which is a huge plus.

"he has kept mocking the media, which is a huge plus"

Judging from the American media's reporting on Trump and, say, al-Jazeera, it's obvious our pundits are never going to get over being completely, absolutely, stunningly, irrevocably wrong about the 2016 elections.

It's been said that Trump's supporters took him seriously and his opponents pretended to take him literally.
So, if speaks in metaphors, his opponents, as if they were just starting the autism spectrum, run to the dictionary and discover he's LYING.
If he were to speak of "low-hanging fruit", when discussing illegal immigration, they'd smugly insist that immigrants aren't fruit and so Trump is a liar.
I suspect most of his supporters would be happy if Trump got a handle on illegal immigration--which is what he's signaling and his supporters want--even if it didn't involve a wall.

Maybe in 2021 Gog. Then again, probably not.

"No, the important thing is that you children can never be held accountable for the reprehensible diminution of expectations have for their government: Not international affairs, border control, regulation & revenue, enforcement..."

Who is one of the children here? I can't see that you've set yourself apart.
"Reprehensible diminution of expectations"? That isn't recent, and I have never approved of that. You want to be upset about Trump, or Bush, or Bush, or {pick one}, you must willfully forget the "lesser evil" principle the public apparently demands of the candidate selection process.

"Basically you twerpy little Trumpsters are scot-free,..."

Ah, name-calling. That works on everyone. You do not have any sort of alternative for awhile - something that others here have apparently realized, to move on. Have you availed yourself of your Congressmen and Senators, or are they the sort of shining beacon deserving of your attention?

"I'm still amazed that grown-ass adults believed all the campaign bluster."*

*And voted for Hillary.

Fixed it for ya. After all, she's the "adult", right?

Rad, why are you still bothering with Crid? The man is all bent out of shape that Gary Johnson didn't win. But even as one of Johnson's most ardent supporters he wasn't willing to admit that until after the election was over. How many people accused Crid of being a Hillary supporter because he couldn't admit in public he was a Johnson booster? Well, no wonder Johnson lost massively. If your most ardent supporters can't even admit they are voting for you what hope do you have?

Since then Crid has only further descended into irrelevance. Pointless insults. Random emotional outbursts. Only rarely does he have the energy for a Crid style flowery beatdown. Instead we are left with the stupidly ridiculous like his Texas flooding predictions. At the rate he is going he may well be dead of an anger induced aneurysm before Trump gets reelected.

Though I have to admit I'm no better than you, Rad, at ignoring the irrelevance. That flood thing was really really stupid. But now we are going to get some noise about kissing girls or college or some other pointless gibberish.

Amy: A number of you are still defending the man here.

Rex Little: Short of getting us into a war with North Korea (which I guess is still a possibility), Trump can't possibly do as much damage as Clinton would be guaranteed to do if she ever got a Democratic majority in Congress.

There were many people who voted from Trump because they actually liked him and/or what he was saying during the campaign. Rex may be in that group but his comment speaks to people in the other group who voted for Trump: those who didn't like him but voted for him because they hated Clinton.

No matter how horrible Trump is, you're never going to convince people in that latter group that Trump is worse than Clinton would have been. Even if Trump gets us into a war with North Korea, Clinton haters would argue that Clinton would've gotten us into a war with not only North Korea, but also Russia and Saudi Arabia. Trump could be caught having sex with a ten year old girl in the Oval Office and Clinton-haters would argue that Clinton not only would have had sex with a ten year old boy but also would have chopped him up and eaten him.

So what?

Hillary ain't President and her husband isn't running around the White house "playing" with interns.

Even better is the job market - after 8 long years of Obamanation; people are finding full-time, good-paying jobs. We get to do more than live paycheck to paycheck.

Trump keeps this up you better believe I WILL be voting for Trump again!

That the media and the Democrats are having a mass hysterical meltdown is, well, just fun to watch.

Actually, JD, I voted for Johnson. I've voted Libertarian in every election since I turned 21 (which is also every election since the party was founded).

However, I had a strong preference for Trump over Clinton. My worst nightmare is an activist President with a compliant Congress (Dubya and LBJ being the prime examples from their respective parties). Trump is despised by the establishment of both parties, so no matter who controls Congress I figured they wouldn't cooperate with him, as in fact they haven't.

As long as Congress was solidly Republican, Clinton would have been kept in reasonable check, but can you imagine what she'd do with a Democratic majority at her back? As for war, I do think she posed a real danger of getting into a shooting match with Russia over her proposed no-fly zone in Syria.

And of course, as Charles said, the meltdown is great fun to watch.

"Rad, why are you still bothering with Crid?"

Because when he engages his reasoning engine - more than ten years of which are in evidence here - there is no more entertaining poster!

This is second grade all over again when some issues come up, and he's not the only kid in class!

As long as Congress was solidly Republican, Clinton would have been kept in reasonable check, but can you imagine what she'd do with a Democratic majority at her back? ~ Rex Little at August 26, 2017 1:55 PM

Why would a Republican Congress keep her in check? It didn't keep Obama in check. He practically wrote the book on governing without the consent of Congress. If she'd been elected, she'd have written the sequel.

It didn't keep Obama in check. He practically wrote the book on governing without the consent of Congress.

Yes and no. Obama did a lot with executive orders, but he didn't start any wars or create any big new agencies. His signature program, the ACA, was passed when the Democrats had Congress, IIRC. Mostly he maintained and expanded disasters which were created by Dubya and a Republican Congress.

I agree Rad. But it looks like until Trump goes away he'll be in second grade mode. And that is probably 6 years in the future. That is a lot of temper tantrums to wade through in the hope of a rational argument.

Bret Stephens is much the same way. He used to make very rational and insightful works. But then he caught the neverTrump bug. Now it is mostly mischaracterizations, distortions, and straw men. At first it was kind of funny watching an intelligent person becoming a two year old throwing a temper tantrum. But now it is just pathetic. We are all influenced by our emotions but it is long past time to have dealt with those emotions and moved on.

"Or, they're peeing their pants."

Nah, they're Houstonians. Watch the Texas Navy go to work.