There must be some sane liberals somewhere ...

[dogtag]

As hard to believe as that suggestion is, it is possible.
But what might seem less possible would be that both
NBC and ABC would have the hubris to ignore the request
that they carry the President's address to the Nation.
Presidents don't request this unless it is of paramount
importance, so for a news network to even consider not
airing it is something for any sane liberal to think about.
I would think that if they both carried out the threat, it
would surely refute any final claim of news impartiality,
and show them to be nothing more that democrat shrills.
Of course I may well be overestimating the intelligence
of even sane liberals to be capable of reason.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-standoff.html

Personally, I don't think they'll have the guts.

[Vern Humphrey]

The news media complain about how Trump is "undermining" the 1st Amendment, and telling us how important they are in a free society. And, important as they are, they REFUSE to play their role! And thereby destroy their reason for existing.

[JB White]

They played their role. Before the rebuttal both networks had the talking heads slamming the speech and called him a liar to everyone watching.

[togor]

How does a wall address large numbers of women and children surrendering at ports of entry? This is not a question where a Trump "believe me..." is getting it done.

[S.A. Boggs]

How does a wall address large numbers of women and children surrendering at ports of entry? This is not a question where a Trump "believe me..." is getting it done.

Good question Togor, the wall doesn't as the wall is just part of our defense. The guarded wall could 1]keep out those who we want to keep out, 2]could funnel people to legal ports of entry, 3] try and keep out illegal drugs, 4]try to keep cash and weapons from flowing south. We need facilities for asylum seekers to be housed while they are checked for a legal reason to come here and more important for what they bring here and that is diseases.
Why should the United States be the relief valve for any country no matter how "right" it looks? If we keep giving the store away the store will close, is this something we want? I have fuel for the winter for my family, if I give it away a bag at a time because I have stockpiled so much is that a good idea? Some people feel the United States has plenty, but for how long?
This shutdown will affect many Americans in an adverse way, perhaps in good way. It will get the legislative and executive powers to try and do something positive if it continues. It will be painful and not pleasant for many, something I personally hate to see. One has to realize that where our country is going could be determined by the pain of the shutdown. Will the wall be built to do what the President states or will the other people win and we continue our slide to a Venezuelan state for our people?
I for one will be sitting here, as many, to see how this plays out.
Sam

[togor]

The liberal media sends reporters to the border and they report that much of the chaos that has been in the press is the result of deliberate decisions out of Washington DC to make life in US custody more unpleasant, as a deterrent to people presenting themselves at POE for processing. As it happens, the deterrent was not effective and so there are still numbers coming and still the problems created by trying to make detention more unpleasant. That is the reporting. If it is not accurate, then nothing is stopping Fox or Breitbart from sending a reporter down there to paint a different, more accurate picture. Since that hasn't happened, I'll take the reporting as a reasonable explanation of the policy and its effects.

A wall changes none of that. And if a wall were going to be effective, then the act of putting one up would probably increase the flow in the short run, as people get in while they can. Logically the highest priority should be managing the people at the border, getting the necessary law changes and people handling facilities in place before the big crush. (And remember, none of this does a thing about the majority of people who come in from airports or the northern border).

The Trump administration has simply not done a competent job either of running the border or making its case for new resources. And wanting the wall because it was a campaign promise is a political reason, not one based in any sound analysis of what really goes on at the border. Around here there is a general sentiment that large Federal projects are routinely boondoggles. And I don't think even Red would buy a used car or piece of property from Trump, sight unseen, based only on Trump's description of it. And yet people want to give Trump a blank check for $5+B to do a project that has yellow flags all over it. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me except as an expression of tribal politics, and everyone knows my opinion about that.