Was Ending The Shutdown Honorable?!

[*bfine32*]

(01-29-2019, 06:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: What lesson exactly?

With whom to engage in this forum. 

[*bfine32*]

(01-29-2019, 06:23 PM)hollodero Wrote: OK, that would work for me. I doubt it would be politically smart though. You probably don't want to admit any wrongdoing after being perceived the winner.
And Trump wouldn't honor it, he'd see it as weakness. He would probably take to twitter and write that Chuck, as he calls him, just admitted a wrong. It would probably just embolden him to use the shutdown tool once more. Would be my guess.

It's the whole: When they go low we go high thing.

What Chuck said is not as bad as many of the things Trump says on a daily basis; however, he stooped to his level and can no longer assume moral superiority. And the best defense the Left can provide for his comments where "Look what Trump says". 

[BFritz21]

(01-29-2019, 07:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Money had nothing to do with the analogy.  I was just saying that when a person does something bad and then later takes steps to correct his previous bad action then those steps can be considered "honorable".

It wasn't bad that he did it!  He didn't have bad intentions!  He didn't do it to take money from people!  

[fredtoast]

(01-29-2019, 07:20 PM)bfine32 Wrote:  And the best defense the Left can provide for his comments where "Look what Trump says". 

Actually the best defense is that it was not "going low" at all.  There is nothing insulting about saying that you hope some one has learned a lesson.

I have asked you this quite a few times, but here it is again.  How could Shumer have phrased it so that you would not consider it an insult to Trump?

Or is he not allowed to say anything at all about it because it might upset your Donald?

[fredtoast]

(01-29-2019, 07:22 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: It wasn't bad that he did it!  He didn't have bad intentions!  He didn't do it to take money from people!  

If there was nothing bad about it then why did he end it?

It was bad that he did it because he knew exactly what the results would be.  He knew people would not get paid.  He knew there would be lots of collateral damage.  Nothing that happened was unexpected or a surprise.

[fredtoast]

(01-29-2019, 07:16 PM)bfine32 Wrote: With whom to engage in this forum. 

Brilliant.

Again you make a comment about learning some sort of lesson but refuse to say what it is.

Why do you make all of these cryptic posts in the first place if it upsets you so much to explain what they mean?

[GMDino]

(01-29-2019, 07:20 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It's the whole: When they go low we go high thing.

What Chuck said is not as bad as many of the things Trump says on a daily basis; however, he stooped to his level and can no longer assume moral superiority. And the best defense the Left can provide for his comments where "Look what Trump says". 

Trump calls someone a jackwad and claims he will win any fight over it.

The person slaps Trump for calling him a jackwad and Trump apologies for it. But doesn't promise he will never call someone a jackwad again.

Schumer says he hopes Trump learned a lesson about calling people jackwads and doesn't do it again.

Random internet (non-Trump supporter) says Schumer has now lost the moral high ground because he "stooped" to Trump's level by commenting that Trump hopefully will be better in the future based on his experience with getting slapped.


...and scene...


What a world.  

[hollodero]

(01-29-2019, 07:20 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It's the whole: When they go low we go high thing.

Yeah sure... I guess that's not how to deal with Trump and they figured that out. It's tough to be the reasonable one when dealing with a, say, more impulsive person.
Also, really, he said "I hope he learned his lesson". That's not that bad. And it isn't even unreasonable to begin with. Trump doesn't know too much of the political workings and the power layers and he better learn them fast. His being inexperienced played a huge role in all that mess.

(01-29-2019, 07:20 PM)bfine32 Wrote: What Chuck said is not as bad as many of the things Trump says on a daily basis; however, he stooped to his level and can no longer assume moral superiority.

Honestly, these two things just contradict each other.
It's not just you're pure as gold or else no better than anyone. Being way better matters to me. I also see it as morally way superior to not make him the target of a twitter tirade and all kinds of name calling.

[*bfine32*]

(01-29-2019, 09:44 PM)hollodero Wrote: Yeah sure... I guess that's not how to deal with Trump and they figured that out. It's tough to be the reasonable one when dealing with a, say, more impulsive person.
Also, really, he said "I hope he learned his lesson". That's not that bad. And it isn't even unreasonable to begin with. Trump doesn't know too much of the political workings and the power layers and he better learn them fast. His being inexperienced played a huge role in all that mess.



Honestly, these two things just contradict each other.
It's not just you're pure as gold or else no better than anyone. Being way better matters to me. I also see it as morally way superior to not make him the target of a twitter tirade and all kinds of name calling.

I guess I go back more to the question in the OP and my original reply:

Was Shurmer saying "I hope Trump learned his lesson" honorable?

I get it's politics and the common theme is to pick a side. This is why I hope Shultz runs as an Independent and gets some steam. We as a popultion are not so much divided by an ideology as we are party. 

[BFritz21]

(01-29-2019, 07:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Money had nothing to do with the analogy.  I was just saying that when a person does something bad and then later takes steps to correct his previous bad action then those steps can be considered "honorable".

You're really not getting it or you're just intentionally ignoring  it.

Trump didn't shut down the government in order to prevent people from getting paid.

A robber robs someone to get their money.

The robber giving the money back is the moral thing to do because he did a bad thing in the first place that was unnecessary.

Trump opened it back up because he didn't want people to go unpaid.  Trump is/was doing the right thing in working to keep a campaign promise that eventually saves Americans money and helps prevent people from breaking the law.

[BmorePat87]

(01-29-2019, 09:54 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Trump is/was doing the right thing in working to keep a campaign promise that eventually saves Americans money and helps prevent people from breaking the law.

No it doesn't. 

[hollodero]

(01-29-2019, 09:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Was Shurmer saying "I hope Trump learned his lesson" honorable?

I'd say no, not really. But that was not quite what I was talking about.

(01-29-2019, 09:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I get it's politics and the common theme is to pick a side. This is why I hope Shultz runs as an Independent and gets some steam. We as a popultion are not so much divided by an ideology as we are party. 

As long as your election system remains the same, all these attempts will be futile and if somewhat successful, only will cost one side the win. I see all such hopes as pointless.

(Also, this is not just about reflexively picking a side and forge one's arguments accordingly. Not for me.)

[BFritz21]

(01-29-2019, 10:00 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: No it doesn't. 

Not spending money for services on illegal immigrants, while also keeping more jobs open for citizens, doesn't save Americans money?

[GMDino]

(01-29-2019, 09:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I guess I go back more to the question in the OP and my original reply:

Was Shurmer saying "I hope Trump learned his lesson" honorable?

I get it's politics and the common theme is to pick a side. This is why I hope Shultz runs as an Independent and gets some steam. We as a popultion are not so much divided by an ideology as we are party. 

Man did THAT get under your skin.

I guess you don't want Trump to change/learn...anything that will stop him from being the guy you don't support?  

[BmorePat87]

(01-29-2019, 10:32 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Not spending money for services on illegal immigrants, while also keeping more jobs open for citizens, doesn't save Americans money?

The amount we'd save wouldn't be more than the cost. I provided you a study yesterday that broke this down. 

[BFritz21]

(01-29-2019, 10:44 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The amount we'd save wouldn't be more than the cost. I provided you a study yesterday that broke this down. 

That study also was for the wall years ago, not the current situation.  It also didn't consider a lot of the factors that go into the total cost that immigrants bring.

[BmorePat87]

(01-29-2019, 10:55 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: That study also was for the wall years ago, not the current situation.  It also didn't consider a lot of the factors that go into the total cost that immigrants bring.

I'm willing to entertain any studies you have to the contrary. 

[*bfine32*]

(01-29-2019, 10:43 PM)GMDino Wrote: Man did THAT get under your skin.

I guess you don't want Trump to change/learn...anything that will stop him from being the guy you don't support?  

You're free to answer the question instead of worrying about my skin


But I'll give you the courtesy of answering yours. Of course I want Trump to change/learn and if he don't I'll be looking at options in 2020 just like I did in 2016.

[BFritz21]

(01-29-2019, 11:00 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I'm willing to entertain any studies you have to the contrary. 

Studies on common sense.  

Different times, different costs, different circumstances.

[GMDino]

(01-29-2019, 11:22 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You're free to answer the question instead of worrying about my skin


But I'll give you the courtesy of answering yours. Of course I want Trump to change/learn and if he don't I'll be looking at options in 2020 just like I did in 2016.

How many different ways do you want to ask the question?

I've already said it was perfectly acceptable and explained why.  You feeling being upset about it (over and over) don't change that any more than asking it in a dozen different ways.