What extra money for border security is needed above what Trump had? Most certainly money for the wall, but a goodly chunk of the problem is a matter of bringing back the enforcement that was present before Trump left office.

But if we don't move the GOP to the left by capitulating to the Dems, then any chance at a conservative majority in November go away!

/"conservatives"

B-1 83 said:

---

What extra money for border security is needed above what Trump had? Most certainly money for the wall, but a goodly chunk of the problem is a matter of bringing back the enforcement that was present before Trump left office.

---

The money is need now given the sheer numbers of illegals. If they were to enact what Trump had in place, tehy would need additional resources to restore to that level and then hopefully remove the additional funding

Quote:

---

Democrats are in the minority no longer. In a stunning historical development on Friday, Democrats seized upon a Republican surrender to take control of the agenda of the House floor.

An astonishing 165 Democrats voted for a rule from Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) to allow a $100 billion foreign aid supplemental package to the floor Saturday. The House will hold four votes on final passage for each of those packages, including a Ukraine funding bill with tens of billions of American taxpayer dollars.

---

Quote:

---

Minority party members rarely vote for a procedural rule to allow the majority party's agenda to proceed through the House. Doing so in such numbers is wildly unprecedented.

---

Quote:

---

History was first made on Thursday, just before midnight, when, for the first time in recorded history since the House began keeping records the House Rules Committee relied on minority party votes to overcome objections from the majority and advance a rule bill to the House floor.

The powerful House Rules Committee, known for generations as "the Speaker's Committee" for the control the speaker of the House possesses over the committee and its reputation as a rubber stamp for the speaker's agenda, sets the floor agenda for the House through what are known as rules.

---

LINK

There is no true Scotsman in the Republican Party right now

Speaker Hakeem Jeffries does not have a nice ring to it.

I believe I even specified the wall. Keep in mind, additional CBP personnel, if the money for them passed today, are 2 years off. Could there be money allotted for the military to assist immediately?

But if they oust Johnson, a D will be SOTH!!!...as Johnson passes these bills with majority Dem support...

f1ghtintexasaggie said:

---

But if they oust Johnson, a D will be SOTH!!!...as Johnson passes these bills with majority Dem support...

---

And majority Republican support.

Johnson is going to be on Bonginos radio show at 1pm central if you want to hear some tough questions from Dan.

Waffledynamics said:

---

f1ghtintexasaggie said:

---

But if they oust Johnson, a D will be SOTH!!!...as Johnson passes these bills with majority Dem support...

---

And majority Republican support.

---

So he's leaning left for votes rather than leaning right. And you are spinning this as a good thing why?

Waffledynamics said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

f1ghtintexasaggie said:

---

But if they oust Johnson, a D will be SOTH!!!...as Johnson passes these bills with majority Dem support...

---

And majority Republican support.

---

So he's leaning left for votes rather than leaning right. And you are spinning this as a good thing why?

---

Bipartisanship does not mean you're leaning left, unless you're also suggesting that the Democrats are leaning right?

---

It's ok for Johnson to cater to the left as long as the left doesnt get all of what they want but most of what they want? And you call that D's leaning right when the alternative is the R's not giving the D's anything they want...

I'm not really seeing how your arguement has footing from a conservatives perspective.... It sounds more like a moderate's perspective which doesn't jive well with a two party system, but that's a different discussion.

Edit to add, do you think the D's are going to reciprocate with this bipartisanship fantasy if the R's take the Presidency and one Congress chamber in November? The answer is clear that they are not leaning right with bipartisan ship now. They are taking advantage of Johnson and he's screwing us over.

Couldn't give a flying **** about bipartisanship if the bipartisans are selling out the American people.

Waffledynamics said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

f1ghtintexasaggie said:

---

But if they oust Johnson, a D will be SOTH!!!...as Johnson passes these bills with majority Dem support...

---

And majority Republican support.

---

So he's leaning left for votes rather than leaning right. And you are spinning this as a good thing why?

---

Bipartisanship does not mean you're leaning left, unless you're also suggesting that the Democrats are leaning right?

---

It's ok for Johnson to cater to the left as long as the left doesnt get all of what they want but most of what they want? And you call that D's leaning right when the alternative is the R's not giving the D's anything they want...

I'm not really seeing how your arguement has footing from a conservatives perspective.... It sounds more like a moderate's perspective which doesn't jive well with a two party system, but that's a different discussion.

---

A majority in both parties' voted in favor of it. This is not a left vs. right issue.

Further, your logic means that the tiny minority of Republicans that voted with the Democrats to oust McCarthy also sided with the Democrats and we're acting in their interests. Also, those in favor of forcing ByteDance to either divest from TikTok or shut it down must also be shifting left, then.

I'm not taking the moderate position. I don't think about every single issue in partisan purity left vs right fashion. Sometimes there are things the majority of people can agree on.

---

A conservative tenet is to hold government accountable and act in good faith when promises are made. McCarthy did not do that and unfortunately there weren't more Republicans that agreed he needed to go. That's a knock against the rest of the GOP, not the few that wanted to hold him accountable. The D's voting to oust him is irrelevant because it was not a vote for a D SOTH.

The same applies to Johnson. He said he was going to prioritize the border and the conservative ideology, yet he is making concessions with the CR's and Ukraine funding and we have seen zero progress in protecting our border. Border bills are toothless with an Executive that doesn't enforce laws, thus Johnson moving forward with Ukraine funding with or without border bills is catering to the left. No matter how you claim it's bipartisanship.

Johnson doesn't need to go until we have a replacement WHO HAS BEEN VETTED with enough support to win the seat. Otherwise we're just kicking ourselves in the nuts.

Tea Party said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

f1ghtintexasaggie said:

---

But if they oust Johnson, a D will be SOTH!!!...as Johnson passes these bills with majority Dem support...

---

And majority Republican support.

---

So he's leaning left for votes rather than leaning right. And you are spinning this as a good thing why?

---

Bipartisanship does not mean you're leaning left, unless you're also suggesting that the Democrats are leaning right?

---

It's ok for Johnson to cater to the left as long as the left doesnt get all of what they want but most of what they want? And you call that D's leaning right when the alternative is the R's not giving the D's anything they want...

I'm not really seeing how your arguement has footing from a conservatives perspective.... It sounds more like a moderate's perspective which doesn't jive well with a two party system, but that's a different discussion.

---

A majority in both parties' voted in favor of it. This is not a left vs. right issue.

Further, your logic means that the tiny minority of Republicans that voted with the Democrats to oust McCarthy also sided with the Democrats and we're acting in their interests. Also, those in favor of forcing ByteDance to either divest from TikTok or shut it down must also be shifting left, then.

I'm not taking the moderate position. I don't think about every single issue in partisan purity left vs right fashion. Sometimes there are things the majority of people can agree on.

---

A conservative tenet is to hold government accountable and act in good faith when promises are made. McCarthy did not do that and unfortunately there weren't more Republicans that agreed he needed to go. That's a knock against the rest of the GOP, not the few that wanted to hold him accountable. The D's voting to oust him is irrelevant because it was not a vote for a D SOTH.

The same applies to Johnson. He said he was going to prioritize the border and the conservative ideology, yet he is making concessions with the CR's and Ukraine funding and we have seen zero progress in protecting our border. Border bills are toothless with an Executive that doesn't enforce laws, thus Johnson moving forward with Ukraine funding with or without border bills is catering to the left. No matter how you claim it's bipartisanship.

---

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3456207/replies/67397165

Waffledynamics said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

f1ghtintexasaggie said:

---

But if they oust Johnson, a D will be SOTH!!!...as Johnson passes these bills with majority Dem support...

---

And majority Republican support.

---

So he's leaning left for votes rather than leaning right. And you are spinning this as a good thing why?

---

Bipartisanship does not mean you're leaning left, unless you're also suggesting that the Democrats are leaning right?

---

It's ok for Johnson to cater to the left as long as the left doesnt get all of what they want but most of what they want? And you call that D's leaning right when the alternative is the R's not giving the D's anything they want...

I'm not really seeing how your arguement has footing from a conservatives perspective.... It sounds more like a moderate's perspective which doesn't jive well with a two party system, but that's a different discussion.

---

A majority in both parties' voted in favor of it. This is not a left vs. right issue.

Further, your logic means that the tiny minority of Republicans that voted with the Democrats to oust McCarthy also sided with the Democrats and we're acting in their interests. Also, those in favor of forcing ByteDance to either divest from TikTok or shut it down must also be shifting left, then.

I'm not taking the moderate position. I don't think about every single issue in partisan purity left vs right fashion. Sometimes there are things the majority of people can agree on.

---

A conservative tenet is to hold government accountable and act in good faith when promises are made. McCarthy did not do that and unfortunately there weren't more Republicans that agreed he needed to go. That's a knock against the rest of the GOP, not the few that wanted to hold him accountable. The D's voting to oust him is irrelevant because it was not a vote for a D SOTH.

The same applies to Johnson. He said he was going to prioritize the border and the conservative ideology, yet he is making concessions with the CR's and Ukraine funding and we have seen zero progress in protecting our border. Border bills are toothless with an Executive that doesn't enforce laws, thus Johnson moving forward with Ukraine funding with or without border bills is catering to the left. No matter how you claim it's bipartisanship.

---

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3456207/replies/67397165

---

Still missing the point that the border is the priority. Separate bills is fine. Combining them is also fine. I don't care and I'm assuming most conservatives dont care either, as long as our border is the first priority.

Giving money to Ukraine before our border is secured is catering to the left. A border bill being attached to the Ukraine funding does not guarantee our border will be secure since the Executive has proven to ignore laws on the books. Thus our border is playing second fiddle again and Johnson is showing how he is catering to the left, not being bipartisan like you say.

Johnson is done as speaker, and rightfully so.

Let's see how Jeffries does.

Same legislation/appropriations either way, so I am curious how it will go for him.

Losing the House over utterly pointless Ukraine 'aid' will be his legacy, in the middle of a critical election year.

America first!

nortex97 said:

---

Johnson is done as speaker, and rightfully so.

Let's see how Jeffries does.

Same legislation/appropriations either way, so I am curious how it will go for him.

Losing the House over utterly pointless Ukraine 'aid' will be his legacy, in the middle of a critical election year.

---

Yep.

Lol. LMAO.

Old Army Metal said:

---

Lol. LMAO.

---

I realize that it's hard for you to understand people in the same party having different ideas. After all, blue dog Dems were able to come around on baby killing, transgender nonsense and anti-coal.

Tea Party said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

f1ghtintexasaggie said:

---

But if they oust Johnson, a D will be SOTH!!!...as Johnson passes these bills with majority Dem support...

---

And majority Republican support.

---

So he's leaning left for votes rather than leaning right. And you are spinning this as a good thing why?

---

Bipartisanship does not mean you're leaning left, unless you're also suggesting that the Democrats are leaning right?

---

It's ok for Johnson to cater to the left as long as the left doesnt get all of what they want but most of what they want? And you call that D's leaning right when the alternative is the R's not giving the D's anything they want...

I'm not really seeing how your arguement has footing from a conservatives perspective.... It sounds more like a moderate's perspective which doesn't jive well with a two party system, but that's a different discussion.

---

A majority in both parties' voted in favor of it. This is not a left vs. right issue.

Further, your logic means that the tiny minority of Republicans that voted with the Democrats to oust McCarthy also sided with the Democrats and we're acting in their interests. Also, those in favor of forcing ByteDance to either divest from TikTok or shut it down must also be shifting left, then.

I'm not taking the moderate position. I don't think about every single issue in partisan purity left vs right fashion. Sometimes there are things the majority of people can agree on.

---

A conservative tenet is to hold government accountable and act in good faith when promises are made. McCarthy did not do that and unfortunately there weren't more Republicans that agreed he needed to go. That's a knock against the rest of the GOP, not the few that wanted to hold him accountable. The D's voting to oust him is irrelevant because it was not a vote for a D SOTH.

The same applies to Johnson. He said he was going to prioritize the border and the conservative ideology, yet he is making concessions with the CR's and Ukraine funding and we have seen zero progress in protecting our border. Border bills are toothless with an Executive that doesn't enforce laws, thus Johnson moving forward with Ukraine funding with or without border bills is catering to the left. No matter how you claim it's bipartisanship.

---

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3456207/replies/67397165

---

Still missing the point that the border is the priority. Separate bills is fine. Combining them is also fine. I don't care and I'm assuming most conservatives dont care either, as long as our border is the first priority.

Giving money to Ukraine before our border is secured is catering to the left. A border bill being attached to the Ukraine funding does not guarantee our border will be secure since the Executive has proven to ignore laws on the books. Thus our border is playing second fiddle again and Johnson is showing how he is catering to the left, not being bipartisan like you say.

---

This is effectively tantrum-throwing. The GOP needs to win the presidency. Expecting them to just block everything will not work out the way you want it to, nor will adding to the attrition and ending up with a Dem speaker or in the minority.

In the meantime, the world is not sitting around waiting for us to fix the border.