What is it going to take to restart the US Government after the shutdown, and what does it all mean?

[Final-Fan]

Aeolus451 said:

Final-Fan said:

Stop shifting goalposts.  Your specific claim was that there were "multiple" instances of "Democrats in 2017-18" saying the "equivalent" of "I'm almost giddy thinking about a government shutdown next year. I cannot wait".  The evidence you cited substantiates that they were willing to have a shutdown, not that they were eager to do it or happy about getting the chance to do it. 

If you want to step back from your earlier claim, and instead make a more defensible claim, then this can serve as evidence.  But it does not substantiate the claim you actually made that I challenged you on. 

My claim was always that dems wanted and caused the shutdown. What I listed was to show that. I'm not the one shifting goal posts.

If what you meant to claim wasn't the same as what you actually claimed, then fine.  What you intended to claim may well be reasonable.  But I am not necessarily prepared in all cases to make assumptions about which of your posts should or should not be taken seriously.  Take this, for example: 

Final-Fan said:

Aeolus451 said:

The kkk is a child of the left. Just had to point that out. 😹

Please elaborate.  As far as I know, the KKK is only a "child of the left" in the sense that it was originally formed as a reaction to leftist Radical Republicans crushing the rebellion and freeing the slaves (and other civil rights legislation). 

—The first Klan ... see above.  Often functioned as a paramilitary group targeting blacks and Republicans, with the goal of restoring absolute white supremacy and throwing off the yoke of Northern-influenced rule.  Very pro-Democrat and anti-Republican, with the understanding that Republicans were "left" and Democrats were "right". 
—The second Klan was revived from almost nothing in the aftermath of the movie Birth of a Nation.  Still very anti-black and anti-integration but also extremely anti-Catholic, anti-Jewish, and against what it saw as moral decline in a number of areas.  A historian notes that "it was non-partisan in the sense that it pressed its nativist issues to both parties." (Wikipedia) After a decade of extreme growth, it declined in popularity and ceased to be a relevant national organization by the 1930s (arguably) or 40s. 
—The third Klan was not AFAIK a centrally organized movement like the others but more a wave of independent groups calling themselves the KKK, springing up in opposition to civil rights movements (again).  Would be against the Democratic Party as the term is understood today, but possibly pro-"Dixiecrats" (Democrats who opposed civil rights legislation, many of whom left the Democratic Party for third parties and/or the Republican Party). 

I don't see how it's reasonable to call any of that "a child of the left" unless you actually mean "it wouldn't have happened if they just wouldn't keep giving people all those civil rights!"  I'm not saying that is what you mean—please tell me what you do mean. 

When you make a claim, should I take it at face value as being your actual position, or not?