Shutdown Over Border Security?

[carpedm9587]

Re-read the post to which I responded.

So I assume you mean this one:

Well thought out response, Sparko. Unfortunately, pretty much what I've come to expect.

And how do you think that post makes an assumption about Sparko? He essentially repeated the broad brush that was the subject of the previous posts - which is indeed what I have come to expect. So I guess I'm not seeing mind reading here...

I see you chose option c, by somehow looking past it.

So the advice is "read more carefully?"
If so, I can report that I attempt to read every post carefully, OBP. I can't say I'm perfect about it, but I try. What makes you think I don't?

Carpe, you ASSUMED that Sparko was doing his "usual dig in and double down".

I noted that he was repeating the exact "broad brush" that was the subject of the discussion, because that's what he actually did - hence "double down." I don't need to be a mind reader to recognize the meaning of the English language. Why he chose to do so I have no idea. But, historically, that is how discussions with Sparko go, hence the observation.

You seem to be very concerned about this exchange. Is there a particular reason?

[carpedm9587]

This is about me, isn't it?

Always...


I actually have appreciated your "broad brush" comments, CP. It's a bad habit. Having you call me on it brings it front and center and I do it less frequently.

[Cow Poke]

Always...


I actually have appreciated your "broad brush" comments, CP. It's a bad habit. Having you call me on it brings it front and center and I do it less frequently.

It's something all you liberals do virtually all the time, so calling you out on it reminds me never to do it myself.

[carpedm9587]

Duplicate deleted...

[carpedm9587]

I am a very sarcastic person Carp. I don't take too much on tweb all that seriously. Especially all this political nonsense. I haven't even turned on the TV news in over a month other than what I catch when flipping channels. When you start going off about broad brush this and that all over the place, I can't help myself. OBP knows me too well.

I will sometimes lean to sarcasm if pushed hard enough - but generally I'm not a sarcastic person.

But I seriously have to question the "not too seriously" part. It seems to me that when someone reaches the point where they are calling into question someone else's character - they've very likely drifted into "taking it seriously."

I hold the positions I hold because I've researched them, considered the varying views, and arrived at a conclusion. When I engage in discussions, I look for new information - or new interpretations of existing information. How seriously I take it depends on the subject and (frankly) the person I'm discussing it with. Some people here I've found seem truly interested in exploring ideas. MaxVel and Quacamole are two that immediately come to mind. Others seems to be largely interested in being insulting and beating down any point of view that is not theirs. Pix, MM, and Rogue are a few that immediately come to mind. Others will engage in discussions, ranging from civility to insulting, depending on the day and whatever (presumably) is going on for them. You, OBP, and CP (to varying degrees) fall into that camp. Talking with Max and MM is fairly easy. I know I'm going to have a civil discussion with the first, and I'm going to get insulted by the latter. Talking with you and CP and OBP is more difficult. Sometimes you're joking and I take you seriously, and sometimes your serious and I respond as if you were joking.

But, in general, I have found that most people here have made-up minds and are immune to any outside ideas, even when they are accompanied by information. That is my experience on every "conservative" forum I participate in, save one. The one exception is a forum that calls themselves "Rational Republicans" and are generally more moderate in their views. I have the same experience on the more "extreme" liberal sites as well. On those, however, I will be regularly sworn at (which doesn't happen here).

We live in amazingly interesting times. Not everything about these times is particularly welcome, IMO.

[carpedm9587]

It's something all you liberals do virtually all the time, so calling you out on it reminds me never to do it myself.

You can stop painting now...

[Cow Poke]

You can stop painting now...

[One Bad Pig]

So I assume you mean this one:

Well thought out response, Sparko. Unfortunately, pretty much what I've come to expect.

And how do you think that post makes an assumption about Sparko? He essentially repeated the broad brush that was the subject of the previous posts - which is indeed what I have come to expect. So I guess I'm not seeing mind reading here...

Holy guacamole, carpe. I bow to your mastery of evading the point.

So the advice is "read more carefully?"
If so, I can report that I attempt to read every post carefully, OBP.

Ah, so you DID manage to notice the post to which I was referring. Why, then, the jackassery of pretending you though I was referring to Sparko's post?

I can't say I'm perfect about it, but I try. What makes you think I don't?

Your admission that you tend to skip around and only read portions of a conversation at times?

I noted that he was repeating the exact "broad brush" that was the subject of the discussion, because that's what he actually did - hence "double down." I don't need to be a mind reader to recognize the meaning of the English language. Why he chose to do so I have no idea. But, historically, that is how discussions with Sparko go, hence the observation.

I see you managed to totally ignore my (and Sparko's) counter-explanation, for whatever reason, in favor of continuing your broad-brush of Sparko's posting style.

You seem to be very concerned about this exchange. Is there a particular reason?

Is there a a particular reason you're yet again attempting to mind-read?

[Tassman]

I'm not seeing anything in the act that defines "national emergency," which is the basic problem. What it defines is what a president can do. Unless I'm missing something?

We know what a National Emergency is not. There is nothing occurring at the Mexican border that can be construed as a National Emergency. “The refusal of congress to fund a presidential vanity project is not an emergency” —Ciara Torres-Spelliscy

[carpedm9587]

Your admission that you tend to skip around and only read portions of a conversation at times?

I think there is a disconnect here. I read the posts that are responses to me - and attempt to read them carefully. I do not necessarily read every post by every poster. If that's the requirement for posting in a thread, then I am in the wrong forum. There's no way I'd keep up.

Is there a a particular reason you're yet again attempting to mind-read?

You're right. I wrote that badly. My intent was not to mind read, but to check in. I should have written:

I'm getting the impression that you are very concerned about this exchange. Is that accurate and, if so, is there a particular reason?

[carpedm9587]

We know what a National Emergency is not. There is nothing occurring at the Mexican border that can be construed as a National Emergency. “The refusal of congress to fund a presidential vanity project is not an emergency” —Ciara Torres-Spelliscy

What we "know" is not the issue, Tass. The courts will look at Trump's choice and measure it against the act to determine legality. They may look at the act and determine its constitutionality. I don't know if this act has ever passed a constitutional test. But the act is badly written in that it does not offer an explanation for, or limit on, "national emergency." As such, there may be no way to rule Trump's declaration either "illegal" or "unconstitutional." The court does use another metric sometimes: harm. If Trump pulls funds from places and projects that can show grievous harm, that may be a path.

I'm not holding my breath. And, frankly, I hope he does a fair amount of "grievous harm." The more people he harms outside his base, the slimmer his chances for re-election and this national embarrassment can end. Doing grievous harm within his base is not likely to change very many of their minds about Trump. At least, it hasn't so far.

[Sparko]

This is about me, isn't it?

No it's about me this time dammit!!

[Sparko]

But, in general, I have found that most people here have made-up minds and are immune to any outside ideas, even when they are accompanied by information.

Well then, you fit in here perfectly!

[carpedm9587]

Well then, you fit in here perfectly!

I wish I could claim to not be subject to confirmation bias, but I am human too. The only thing I can claim is that I work at it - which is why I visit and post at sites like this one. How successful I am at battling confirmation bias is not something I can assess or make claims about.

[Sparko]

Just for the record, I think Trump declaring a national emergency to get his way to pay for a border wall that he promised Mexico was going to pay for, was the wrong move.