How quickly we forget.
Republicans in Congress tried to de-fund and abolish the DHS under Obama...
Google hits on articles especially in 2015, but there was noise about it all 8 years.
And Republicans weren't unanimous about creating DHS in the first place.

Stop. There were never legitimate calls to abolish the DHS. It was a defunding tactic to derail Obama's immigration executive action. It was never about defunding ALL of DHS or getting rid of it.

What you just wrote there is called "the benefit of the doubt."
They definitely tried to de-fund DHS.
You excuse it as a tactic.  You say, their motive was something else, something good.
Maybe it was.
But now you owe AOC the same benefit of the doubt.
"Oh but she's different," you say.
In the subjective world of your feelings, sure, but out here in objective reality, no one knows anyone else's motives or intentions for sure.
Give that benefit of the doubt to all of them or none of them.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Anyone on here care to enlighten a former Coastie on why the hell defunding and/or abolishing the DHS is a good idea? Anyone have an idea of the strategic Snafu that would cause? Where would the Coast Guard fall? Under DOT again?

---

Anyone on here care to enlighten a former Coastie on why the hell defunding and/or abolishing the DHS is a good idea? Anyone have an idea of the strategic Snafu that would cause? Where would the Coast Guard fall? Under DOT again?

1. No one was asking for a DHS before 9/11. It's the ultimate knee-jerk of a President who had to make it look like he was doing lots of things.
2. It's a money sink with minimal returns. DOJ upholds the law. HHS works on humanitarian issues. DHS...oversees the Thousands Standing Around and covers for the NSA?

Things worked fine when the USCG flipped between DOT/military. Convince me otherwise.

---

Anyone on here care to enlighten a former Coastie on why the hell defunding and/or abolishing the DHS is a good idea? Anyone have an idea of the strategic Snafu that would cause? Where would the Coast Guard fall? Under DOT again?

1. No one was asking for a DHS before 9/11. It's the ultimate knee-jerk of a President who had to make it look like he was doing lots of things.
2. It's a money sink with minimal returns. DOJ upholds the law. HHS works on humanitarian issues. DHS...oversees the Thousands Standing Around and covers for the NSA?

Things worked fine when the USCG flipped between DOT/military. Convince me otherwise.

Thousands of people died and you call setting up a department to prevent that from happen again is knee jerk? Obviously what they had before the DHS wasn't working.

If there is a problem with the DHS, you fix it. You don't throw it away and pretend nothing ever happened.

---

TJ is becoming radicalized. Hope we don't see you in the news for trying to join ISIS!

---

Anyone on here care to enlighten a former Coastie on why the hell defunding and/or abolishing the DHS is a good idea? Anyone have an idea of the strategic Snafu that would cause? Where would the Coast Guard fall? Under DOT again?

1. No one was asking for a DHS before 9/11. It's the ultimate knee-jerk of a President who had to make it look like he was doing lots of things.
2. It's a money sink with minimal returns. DOJ upholds the law. HHS works on humanitarian issues. DHS...oversees the Thousands Standing Around and covers for the NSA?

Things worked fine when the USCG flipped between DOT/military. Convince me otherwise.

Things didn’t work fine. Hence the culmination of events leading up to 9/11.The sharing of information or lack there of created a large void in national security that got exposed. It’s a different world that requires different measures and a DHS alignment with additional transportation security makes since.

---

Stop. There were never legitimate calls to abolish the DHS. It was a defunding tactic to derail Obama's immigration executive action. It was never about defunding ALL of DHS or getting rid of it.

What you just wrote there is called "the benefit of the doubt."
They definitely tried to de-fund DHS.
You excuse it as a tactic.  You say, their motive was something else, something good.
Maybe it was.
But now you owe AOC the same benefit of the doubt.
"Oh but she's different," you say.
In the subjective world of your feelings, sure, but out here in objective reality, no one knows anyone else's motives or intentions for sure.
Give that benefit of the doubt to all of them or none of them.

Like you, AOC is a blow hard. Show me what I typed is wrong. Not interested in your extracurricular bloviating.

---

---

What you just wrote there is called "the benefit of the doubt."
They definitely tried to de-fund DHS.
You excuse it as a tactic.  You say, their motive was something else, something good.
Maybe it was.
But now you owe AOC the same benefit of the doubt.
"Oh but she's different," you say.
In the subjective world of your feelings, sure, but out here in objective reality, no one knows anyone else's motives or intentions for sure.
Give that benefit of the doubt to all of them or none of them.

Like you, AOC is a blow hard. Show me what I typed is wrong. Not interested in your extracurricular bloviating.

What you typed might be right.
You explained the motives of politicians that you identify with.
And you might be right about their motives.
What you haven't done is look at the motives of people calling to abolish ICE or defund DHS today.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

TJ  is becoming radicalized. Hope we don't see you in the news for trying to join ISIS!

I've never been a fan of DHS. That's nothing new, definitely not something brought on by AOC. I don't know what her stated logic for the argument is, but I imagine it has something to do with systemic oppression of minorities at the hands of the 1%, blah blah blah, her usual shtick. She's pissing off other Democrats now. Hopefully a sign of her early 2021 departure.

---

Anyone on here care to enlighten a former Coastie on why the hell defunding and/or abolishing the DHS is a good idea? Anyone have an idea of the strategic Snafu that would cause? Where would the Coast Guard fall? Under DOT again?

1. No one was asking for a DHS before 9/11. It's the ultimate knee-jerk of a President who had to make it look like he was doing lots of things.

*No one knew we needed DHS. A massive terrorist attack against our country that COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED changed that. Knee jerk? Possibly. It was absolutely necessary though, and DHS is still relevant.

2. It's a money sink with minimal returns. DOJ upholds the law. HHS works on humanitarian issues. DHS...oversees the Thousands Standing Around and covers for the NSA?

*This is just ignorance. So I stood around for ten years of my life doing nothing? Right.....
How about you educate yourself before making yourself look stupid? It’s not hard. Simply Google DHS and look at the Mission Statement. 

Things worked fine when the USCG flipped between DOT/military. Convince me otherwise.

* Ok.... so prior to 9/11 sure, DOT it is. Problem is that with the structuring with DHS, the Coast Guard job expanded in scope.

1)Search and Rescue 
2) Aids to Navigation
3) Migrant Interdiction 
4) Drug Interdiction 

This was expanded after 9/11

5) PWCS patrols (port, waterways, Coast, and shoreline)
6) Shear numbers of ship inspections of international ships.

The U.S. Coast Guard cannot move to DOD or Military on a permanent basis, there are United States Codes that prevent this.
The Coast Guard cannot board foreign flagged vessels under DOD, this would make it an act of war. 

---

1. No one was asking for a DHS before 9/11. It's the ultimate knee-jerk of a President who had to make it look like he was doing lots of things.

2. It's a money sink with minimal returns. DOJ upholds the law. HHS works on humanitarian issues. DHS...oversees the Thousands Standing Around and covers for the NSA?

Things worked fine when the USCG flipped between DOT/military. Convince me otherwise.

1. No one was asking for a DHS before 9/11. It's the ultimate knee-jerk of a President who had to make it look like he was doing lots of things.

*No one knew we needed DHS. A massive terrorist attack against our country that COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED changed that. Knee jerk? Possibly. It was absolutely necessary though, and DHS is still relevant.

2. It's a money sink with minimal returns. DOJ upholds the law. HHS works on humanitarian issues. DHS...oversees the Thousands Standing Around and covers for the NSA?

*This is just ignorance. So I stood around for ten years of my life doing nothing? Right.....
How about you educate yourself before making yourself look stupid? It’s not hard. Simply Google DHS and look at the Mission Statement. 

Things worked fine when the USCG flipped between DOT/military. Convince me otherwise.

* Ok.... so prior to 9/11 sure, DOT it is. Problem is that with the structuring with DHS, the Coast Guard job expanded in scope.

1)Search and Rescue 
2) Aids to Navigation
3) Migrant Interdiction 
4) Drug Interdiction 

This was expanded after 9/11

5) PWCS patrols (port, waterways, Coast, and shoreline)
6) Shear numbers of ship inspections of international ships.

The U.S. Coast Guard cannot move to DOD or Military on a permanent basis, there are United States Codes that prevent this.
The Coast Guard cannot board foreign flagged vessels under DOD, this would make it an act of war. 

---

I have no clue what happened above... probably user error. I apologize Ladies and Gentlemen.

---

People like her make Trump seem like a reasonable, responsible person, which is quite an achievement.

No kidding.

---

Her constituents are as dumb as she is. She will be in government until she is older than Nancy.

---

People like her make Trump seem like a reasonable, responsible person, which is quite an achievement.

It must kill you that he is doing a great job.

That doesn't mean he's reasonable or responsible. Even a lunatic excels at something.

---

Anyone on here care to enlighten a former Coastie on why the hell defunding and/or abolishing the DHS is a good idea? Anyone have an idea of the strategic Snafu that would cause? Where would the Coast Guard fall? Under DOT again?

1. No one was asking for a DHS before 9/11. It's the ultimate knee-jerk of a President who had to make it look like he was doing lots of things.
2. It's a money sink with minimal returns. DOJ upholds the law. HHS works on humanitarian issues. DHS...oversees the Thousands Standing Around and covers for the NSA?

Things worked fine when the USCG flipped between DOT/military. Convince me otherwise.

Have you watched Looming Tower on Hulu? It's a limited series based on a book by the same name and it showed the utter ineptitude of the CIA and FBI running up to 9/11. We all know they don't like to share info as it is and they flat out screwed the pooch on communicating very specific information that could have possibly prevented 9/11, or at least lessened the damage had they found even one of the groups that took down a plane. I think at the time this is what Bush saw and tried to make an agency work toward that never happening again. 

Alas, the government is gonna government and we have yet another money consuming watchdog agency that does pretty much what you say it does.

---

People like her make Trump seem like a reasonable, responsible person, which is quite an achievement.

No kidding.

---

Her constituents are as dumb as she is. She will be in government until she is older than Nancy.

---

It must kill you that he is doing a great job.

That doesn't mean he's reasonable or responsible. Even a lunatic excels at something.

Hes not responsible or reasonable? You act like he is out there starting wars or something.

Why are people so pissed off we have a President who puts his own country first? I don't get it.

---

No kidding.

---

That doesn't mean he's reasonable or responsible. Even a lunatic excels at something.

Hes not responsible or reasonable? You act like he is out there starting wars or something.

Why are people so pissed off we have a President who puts his own country first? I don't get it.

Because he's rude, juvenile, and boorish. He's just not nice enough to roll over for everyone on Earth like good Americans are supposed to do.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

No kidding.

---

That doesn't mean he's reasonable or responsible. Even a lunatic excels at something.

Hes not responsible or reasonable? You act like he is out there starting wars or something.

Why are people so pissed off we have a President who puts his own country first? I don't get it.

I'm not pissed. 

He was not considered reasonable nor responsible long before he became POTUS. And being POTUS doesn't change a personality, it emphasizes it good, bad or ugly. 

I've always thought he was a misogynist and narcissist. Has he done some positive things for the country? Sure, but it doesn't mean he's THE BEST THING EVER. He thinks that but he's really not all that.

---

Hes not responsible or reasonable? You act like he is out there starting wars or something.

Why are people so pissed off we have a President who puts his own country first? I don't get it.

Because he's rude, juvenile, and boorish. He's just not nice enough to roll over for everyone on Earth like good Americans are supposed to do.

The two presidents named Roosevelt were both well known for making sure our interests are considered abroad.
And neither was ever described as rude or juvenile or boorish.
You can put America first without insulting people.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Because he's rude, juvenile, and boorish. He's just not nice enough to roll over for everyone on Earth like good Americans are supposed to do.

The two presidents named Roosevelt were both well known for making sure our interests are considered abroad.
And neither was ever described as rude or juvenile or boorish.
You can put America first without insulting people.

It's my observation that the old rules no longer apply. This man fights and he's really the only one in the last 12 years doing so for the side I want to prevail.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Because he's rude, juvenile, and boorish. He's just not nice enough to roll over for everyone on Earth like good Americans are supposed to do.

The two presidents named Roosevelt were both well known for making sure our interests are considered abroad.
And neither was ever described as rude or juvenile or boorish.
You can put America first without insulting people.

That was then, this is now. Name a current politician who would have put America first. There's not a single Democrat who would do so, and maybe only Cruz on the Republican side.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

The two presidents named Roosevelt were both well known for making sure our interests are considered abroad.
And neither was ever described as rude or juvenile or boorish.
You can put America first without insulting people.

That was then, this is now. Name a current politician who would have put America first. There's not a single Democrat who would do so, and maybe only Cruz on the Republican side.

I think Dan Kildee is a righteous dude.

---

I also like Andrew Yang.

---