President Trump

Politics, Religion, Salsa Recipes, etc. Everything you shouldn't bring up at your Uncle's house.

Re: President Trump

Postby RiverDog » Thu Jun 15, 2017 10:38 pm

burrrton wrote:No, a couple have, and their rationale for doing so has dumbfounded most. Whatever you think of the wisdom of the EO, it's a tortured path of argument to get to "The POTUS doesn't have the authority to pause immigration from failed states because he's an @sshole".

No matter what he said, if the EO doesn't ban Muslims, it doesn't ban Muslims. There's no way to get around that tautology.

I'm done arguing about it, though- the Supremes will have the final say, although I'm not sure it will matter at that point.


I read an opinion that said most judges feel Trump's tweets and campaign statements are relevant, but now I can't find it. However, your statement that there are only "a couple" of judges that harbor that opinion is way off. At the very least, there are numerous judges and legal scholars that say the jacking of his jaws is relevant.

Here's a good article on the issue: http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-tr ... ase-2017-6

Personally I do hope they hold him accountable. Trump used his very caustic, inflammatory rhetoric to energize his fan base, everything from throwing Hillary in jail to his statements about illegals being a pack of criminals when the facts are otherwise. He ran a campaign that would make Howard Stern blush.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: President Trump

Postby NorthHawk » Sat Jun 17, 2017 4:15 pm

Intent in many cases is considered.
Although not quite relevant in this case, the intent to murder or accidentally causing death is one example.

I believe the intent to deceive in business can be a factor when dealing turn sour as well. If someone with good intentions screws up they may be looked upon differently than someone who is trying to rip another off.
In those cases I believe past comments are often considered in the judgement process.
We'll find out how the SC rules in this particular case and burrrton may end up being correct.
NorthHawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 10617
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:57 am

Re: President Trump

Postby RiverDog » Wed Jun 21, 2017 8:26 am

I got a kick out of Trump the other day. There was one poll (Rasmussen) that showed his job approval rating was significantly higher at 45% than almost all of the other polls which were trending in the high 30's and he had to celebrate it as if he'd just been re-elected by a landslide. Trump's behavior is laughable.

Not that I'm satisfied with Trump, but there's not much to complain about economically. Unemployment is at 4.3%, the lowest monthly rate in a decade, the stock market is doing great, gas prices are moderate, and inflation is under 2%. Granted, this is still under the previous budget and the new one doesn't take effect until October, but the point is that there's not a great deal to be wetting our pants over, at least not yet.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: President Trump

Postby burrrton » Wed Jun 21, 2017 9:27 am

there's not a great deal to be wetting our pants over, at least not yet.


Ur literally a Nazi for saying that.
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 4213
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: President Trump

Postby Largent80 » Wed Jun 21, 2017 11:13 am

Unemployment has went down steadily for 80 months and has nothing to do with the clown presently in office.
User avatar
Largent80
Legacy
 
Posts: 1745
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 1:38 pm
Location: Tex-ass

Re: President Trump

Postby RiverDog » Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:42 pm

Largent80 wrote:Unemployment has went down steadily for 80 months and has nothing to do with the clown presently in office.


I didn't say that it did. I was simply noting that there was nothing for us to be getting our briefs in a wad over.

Besides, unemployment is just one measure of the economy. The stock market, which definitely does have something to do with the clown presently in office, doesn't seem too concerned about him.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: President Trump

Postby c_hawkbob » Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:40 am

I have no idea whether there are 'tapes' or recordings of my conversations with James Comey, but I did not make, and do not have, any such recordings," wrote Trump in a series of tweets.


Then why the subterfuge? "Fake News" starts with this POTUS, always has. Without this Liar in Chief "fake news" wouldn't even be a part of our modern lexicon.
User avatar
c_hawkbob
Legacy
 
Posts: 6941
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 3:34 pm
Location: Paducah Kentucky, 42001

Re: President Trump

Postby monkey » Thu Jun 22, 2017 12:29 pm

Are you serious? Isn't it incredibly obvious?
1. He's pointing out that with all the spying going on there may be a recording, and with all the leaks, it might get leaked.

2.Trump wanted him to think the conversation might have been recorded so that he would tell the truth this time under oath.

You guys think he's so stupid but he's running ring around the media.
User avatar
monkey
Legacy
 
Posts: 1777
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2013 8:40 pm

Re: President Trump

Postby c_hawkbob » Thu Jun 22, 2017 12:37 pm

He's lying through his teeth on a daily basis, running the biggest con in history and you that voted for and are supporting him are his shills, worse, those of you that make less than seven figures are also his marks along with the rest of us. Everything he's doing is solely for the benefit of he and his fellow billionaires, corporations and big banks. And before you ask; yes, I'm serious.
User avatar
c_hawkbob
Legacy
 
Posts: 6941
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 3:34 pm
Location: Paducah Kentucky, 42001

Re: President Trump

Postby monkey » Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:34 pm

c_hawkbob wrote:He's lying through his teeth on a daily basis, running the biggest con in history and you that voted for and are supporting him are his shills, worse, those of you that make less than seven figures are also his marks along with the rest of us. Everything he's doing is solely for the benefit of he and his fellow billionaires, corporations and big banks. And before you ask; yes, I'm serious.

Prove even one of those ridiculous claims. Just one.

Of course you can't... Because it's impossible to prove those kinds of claims.

You should try making reasonable arguments that you can back up with facts so that a debate, or conversation can be had here. Just saying.
User avatar
monkey
Legacy
 
Posts: 1777
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2013 8:40 pm

Re: President Trump

Postby Hawktawk » Fri Jun 23, 2017 8:48 am

[quote="monkey
He's lying through his teeth on a daily basis, running the biggest con in history and you that voted for and are supporting him are his shills, worse, those of you that make less than seven figures are also his marks along with the rest of us. Everything he's doing is solely for the benefit of he and his fellow billionaires, corporations and big banks. And before you ask; yes, I'm serious.[/quote]

Prove even one of those ridiculous claims. Just one.

Of course you can't... Because it's impossible to prove those kinds of claims.

You should try making reasonable arguments that you can back up with facts so that a debate, or conversation can be had here. Just saying.[/quote]


Trump or any one of his shills calling anyone dishonest is utterly laughable if it weren't so sad and dangerous. He's made a mockery of the truth for decades. Id get carpal tunnel chronicling a fraction of his provable lies. He was going to release his tax returns. He was going to quit tweeting, something even most of his useful idiots support. He was going to sue all 12 of the women he groped right after the election.
He's vilified the free press which is the lifeblood of democracy but they are the ones kicking his stupid ass into the basement, even some of the Faux anchors have had it. He blurted classified secrets, gave multiple explanations for firing Comey, says one thing one day and utterly contradicts it later like praising the house health bill in a rose garden ceremony and then calling it mean a few weeks later. Comey has more integrity and patriotism in his pinkie finger than Trump has in his fat stink bloated body.

Jesus man get a friggin grip on reality. Wake up and smell the Coffefe.
If you like what he's doing along with the 35% shills fine but be honest. He's a lying, groping, tweeting lunatic who cares about Donald Trump more than anything else.

+
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 8481
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: President Trump

Postby Largent80 » Fri Jun 23, 2017 9:30 am

Ostrich dude, ostrich. He gives monkeys a bad name. A Bon Jovi song. You give muuunkeys a bad name.
User avatar
Largent80
Legacy
 
Posts: 1745
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 1:38 pm
Location: Tex-ass

Re: President Trump

Postby RiverDog » Fri Jun 23, 2017 9:53 am

c_hawkbob wrote:He's lying through his teeth on a daily basis, running the biggest con in history and you that voted for and are supporting him are his shills, worse, those of you that make less than seven figures are also his marks along with the rest of us. Everything he's doing is solely for the benefit of he and his fellow billionaires, corporations and big banks. And before you ask; yes, I'm serious.


IMO Trump's motivation to attain the presidency has little to do with money. The man was already a multi billionaire and his fellow billionaires and corporations were doing quite nicely before he decided to run. No, the man's major if not sole motivation is this insatiable ego and desire for attention and approval that he harbors. Even for presidents, of which having a large ego is as much of a prerequisite as any of those listed in the Constitution, Trump's ego makes other former presidents and presidential hopefuls ego look tame and meager in comparison.

That's why the man has such a thin skin and is so quick to react to even the slightest amount of criticism. It conflicts with this self image of his.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: President Trump

Postby Largent80 » Fri Jun 23, 2017 10:19 am

Rump trolled America and IDIOTS bought in. Fake tough dudes just like their mentor.

Any of them would piss down their legs if called on their bullshit.

Way to go American numbskulls by electing your ULTIMATE TOOL. The Master Cylinder of Tools.

And all of you will suffer because of it. Baby boomers like me are f'n screwed because the F8stick will mess up medicare and healthcare just in time for all of us to qualify.


If you voted for Rump I would personally like to kick your weak ass.
User avatar
Largent80
Legacy
 
Posts: 1745
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 1:38 pm
Location: Tex-ass

Re: President Trump

Postby burrrton » Mon Jun 26, 2017 8:38 am

Aaaaand... the injunction on the 'travel ban' is lifted by the SCOTUS (with a few exceptions for individuals like marriage, employment agreements, etc).

In related news, the sun rose in the east this morning.
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 4213
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: President Trump

Postby monkey » Mon Jun 26, 2017 9:49 am

burrrton wrote:In related news, the sun rose in the east this morning.

Everyone who knew anything about the law knew beyond any doubt this would happen. If it didn't, we'd have been looking at a breakdown of literally epic proportions in this country, because it would have radically redefined what is admissible. This would have made it possible to guess someone's intentions, or just suggest someone's possible intentions and use that as equivalent to actions.
This was never ever going to stand. It was pure left wing activism/politics nothing more
User avatar
monkey
Legacy
 
Posts: 1777
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2013 8:40 pm

Re: President Trump

Postby burrrton » Mon Jun 26, 2017 10:41 am

This would have made it possible to guess someone's intentions, or just suggest someone's possible intentions and use that as equivalent to actions.


And to use past statements to read more into an action or law than what is actually there.

To be clear here, the admin's appeal will still be heard in October- it's just a really, really bad sign for the challengers when you can't even get Ginsburg or Sotomayor to buy your arguments.
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 4213
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: President Trump

Postby RiverDog » Mon Jun 26, 2017 9:27 pm

burrrton wrote:Aaaaand... the injunction on the 'travel ban' is lifted by the SCOTUS (with a few exceptions for individuals like marriage, employment agreements, etc).

In related news, the sun rose in the east this morning.


The "few exceptions" is actually quite a lot, and includes entries by those that have admission letters from American schools and, unlike the original ban, does not apply to persons that already have a visa, and because of those exceptions, there's not going to be the mass chaos that ensued after the first attempt by Trump to implement what was obviously an unconstitutional travel ban.

And since the Administration has subsequently eliminated much of the original order that included singling out applicants by means of a religious test, the modified ban is quite different and much more palatable than the first one. No way would SCOTUS have acted the way they did had the original order been put before them.

You guys can do your touchdown dance if that's what floats your boats, but the fact is that this is a compromise decision in which only 3 of the judges supported the entire ban, suggesting that the other 6 had reservations. It also essentially tells Trump to get off his duff and complete the review of vetting procedures he promised when the ban was first implemented over 5 months ago. We'll see what the court has to say in October when they take up the issue.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: President Trump

Postby monkey » Tue Jun 27, 2017 6:07 am

There goes CNN. They are done.
Project Veritas has ruined them.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qj3erw7Gn94
User avatar
monkey
Legacy
 
Posts: 1777
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2013 8:40 pm

Re: President Trump

Postby RiverDog » Tue Jun 27, 2017 8:13 am

monkey wrote:There goes CNN. They are done.
Project Veritas has ruined them.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qj3erw7Gn94


Yea, CNN's credibility has taken a couple of big hits in recent days. They just retracted a story on the Russia-Trump connection, apologized to the target of that story, and accepted the resignations of 3 of their reporters. It's fuel to the fire for conservatives that have contended for decades that the mainstream media is mostly comprised of liberals that taint the view of the news that's presented to the public as fact, with Operation Tailhook (CNN) and the George Bush Air National Guard (CBS/Dan Rather) stories coming to mind. As much as the liberals hate Fox News, I haven't seen them creating false stories to the degree that we've seen from some liberal reporting.

But they are far from 'done.' They are the world's largest news organization and are firmly embedded in the landscape and are going to be here for awhile longer.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: President Trump

Postby burrrton » Tue Jun 27, 2017 8:54 am

You guys can do your touchdown dance if that's what floats your boats


I wasn't trying to rub it in- I just thought it was newsworthy- and your point about the exceptions being rather broad is valid.

I will say, though, that the exceptions are essentially just 'pre-vetted' individuals, which, if they were the reason everyone thought the travel ban was illegal, I'm not sure we ever disagreed on. It was always valid to point them out as some who should have been granted waivers (and a big reason this sloppy EO was politically questionable).

The ban (well, pause, really) remains in place for 99% of people in those countries, and I think it was obvious this would be the case should the Supremes ever get around to ruling on it.

I believe it's also a foregone conclusion how they'll rule in October, but who knows- maybe you'll get to do the TD dance then. :)

[edit]

And since the Administration has subsequently eliminated much of the original order that included singling out applicants by means of a religious test, the modified ban is quite different and much more palatable than the first one. No way would SCOTUS have acted the way they did had the original order been put before them.


Well... maybe not, but the "religious test" wouldn't have been the hangup- we have a long history of moving persecuted religious minorities to the front of the line, and as far as I know, that's all the original language did (and it's unquestionable that Christians qualify as persecuted in those sh*tholes).

We agree it made it more palatable, but that's more of a political benefit than a legal one.
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 4213
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: President Trump

Postby RiverDog » Tue Jun 27, 2017 5:48 pm

burrrton wrote:I wasn't trying to rub it in- I just thought it was newsworthy- and your point about the exceptions being rather broad is valid.

I will say, though, that the exceptions are essentially just 'pre-vetted' individuals, which, if they were the reason everyone thought the travel ban was illegal, I'm not sure we ever disagreed on. It was always valid to point them out as some who should have been granted waivers (and a big reason this sloppy EO was politically questionable).

The ban (well, pause, really) remains in place for 99% of people in those countries, and I think it was obvious this would be the case should the Supremes ever get around to ruling on it.

I believe it's also a foregone conclusion how they'll rule in October, but who knows- maybe you'll get to do the TD dance then. :)

Well... maybe not, but the "religious test" wouldn't have been the hangup- we have a long history of moving persecuted religious minorities to the front of the line, and as far as I know, that's all the original language did (and it's unquestionable that Christians qualify as persecuted in those sh*tholes).

We agree it made it more palatable, but that's more of a political benefit than a legal one.


I wouldn't be so sure that SCOTUS is going to act as you think they will. The fact that there were only 3 justices, the most conservative, that felt the ban was constitutional, means that they'll have to sway two more justices in order to get a majority.

And I assume that based on your statement regarding our long history of moving persecuted religious minorities to the head of the line that you are unaware of the Voyage of the St. Louis:

A State Department telegram sent to a passenger stated that the passengers (all of whom were Jews fleeing Nazi Germany) must "await their turns on the waiting list and qualify for and obtain immigration visas before they may be admissible into the United States."

https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005267
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: President Trump

Postby burrrton » Tue Jun 27, 2017 6:13 pm

And I assume that based on your statement regarding our long history of moving persecuted religious minorities to the head of the line that you are unaware of the Voyage of the St. Louis:


I was indeed unaware. I assume you're also unaware of the plight of Jews from Russia, the Catholics from Vietnam, and so on?

And regarding the SCOTUS, you may be right- I just don't think a few reasonable exceptions (those already vetted) are going to convince FIVE justices to reverse course and override what they just decided was Constitutional otherwise.

Again, when even Notorious RBG declares it within his powers (with those small exceptions), your odds aren't good to get 5 to strike it down**. We'll see, I guess.

**To say nothing of the fact that it's almost eye-rollingly dumb a thing to object to, both legally and morally.
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 4213
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: President Trump

Postby RiverDog » Wed Jun 28, 2017 5:22 am

burrrton wrote:I was indeed unaware. I assume you're also unaware of the plight of Jews from Russia, the Catholics from Vietnam, and so on?

And regarding the SCOTUS, you may be right- I just don't think a few reasonable exceptions (those already vetted) are going to convince FIVE justices to reverse course and override what they just decided was Constitutional otherwise.

Again, when even Notorious RBG declares it within his powers (with those small exceptions), your odds aren't good to get 5 to strike it down**. We'll see, I guess.

**To say nothing of the fact that it's almost eye-rollingly dumb a thing to object to, both legally and morally.


Nope, I was aware. It was your "long history" statement that got me thinking about the Jews that FDR turned away. As far as the current situation in the Middle East goes, I see no reason to prioritize "minority religions" as they are all being subjected to unspeakable horrors. Chemical weapons don't discriminate. Let each application be decided on its own merits regardless of religious preference.

As far as the SCOTUS decision goes, I have given up trying to predict judicial outcomes and felt that you were sounding just a little bit too confident in your assessment. Most of my technical objections were addressed in the temporary lifting of the ban, so I can handle it if the decision goes as you expect. My major beef was with Trump himself. I don't think a candidate should be allowed to go out and make the most outrageous statements he can think of to arouse his voting base and not be held accountable for them once he's in office.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: President Trump

Postby burrrton » Wed Jun 28, 2017 3:52 pm

As far as the current situation in the Middle East goes, I see no reason to prioritize "minority religions" as they are all being subjected to unspeakable horrors.


That Christians are in particular danger isn't controversial. Nobody has it good over there, but it's essentially Christian genocide going on right now in many areas (which you can argue may or may not warrant preferential treatment, but it's not outrageous).

you were sounding just a little bit too confident in your assessment.


Well, I was, but that's only because the injunction was both out of left field and bizarrely argued. This was one of the least surprising SCOTUS decisions in a long time.

I'm similarly confident about how October's going to go, but I really don't think I care anymore except for the precedent it will set.

My major beef was with Trump himself.


I think you've made that quite clear. :)
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 4213
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: President Trump

Postby RiverDog » Wed Jun 28, 2017 7:04 pm

burrrton wrote:"That Christians are in particular danger isn't controversial. Nobody has it good over there, but it's essentially Christian genocide going on right now in many areas (which you can argue may or may not warrant preferential treatment, but it's not outrageous)."


In some areas, I'm sure that's true, and if an applicant wants to say something like "I'm a Christian, and they're singling out Christians" and they can offer some sort of proof to that effect, then that's a perfectly good reason to grant entry IMO. But I don't like arbitrarily moving them to the head of the line in front of other people that may be just as much in need for protection for the sole reason that they're not Muslims. Besides, suppose they don't claim themselves as belonging to any religion, such as an atheist or agnostic? Wouldn't Islamic extremists treat them just as badly if not worse as they do Christians? The original EO said "minority religions", and they obviously wouldn't fall in that category.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: President Trump

Postby Largent80 » Thu Jun 29, 2017 9:38 am

So now president s*** show is tweeting out about how a tv reporter looks.

What a juvenile pile of s*** this person is. Anyone that voted for him and especially ones that still support him need to spend a week in Bubba's cell. Problem is, they would like it.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/morning-jolt ... 43869.html
User avatar
Largent80
Legacy
 
Posts: 1745
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 1:38 pm
Location: Tex-ass

Re: President Trump

Postby c_hawkbob » Thu Jun 29, 2017 10:27 am

You can only facepalm so many times over the guy's immaturity and mean-spiritedness ... it's embarrassing even to his own party:

“Please just stop,” Sasse (R-Neb) tweeted. “This isn’t normal and it’s beneath the dignity of your office.”
User avatar
c_hawkbob
Legacy
 
Posts: 6941
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 3:34 pm
Location: Paducah Kentucky, 42001

Re: President Trump

Postby burrrton » Thu Jun 29, 2017 11:50 am

Besides, suppose they don't claim themselves as belonging to any religion, such as an atheist or agnostic? Wouldn't Islamic extremists treat them just as badly if not worse as they do Christians?


Maybe, but again, it being possible that others could be in a rough situation doesn't make granting preference to a particular religion that is clearly being wiped away an outrageous or unprecedented thing to do.

You make valid points, but it's not completely unreasonable for our immigration process to do what he proposes, either.
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 4213
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: President Trump

Postby Largent80 » Thu Jun 29, 2017 12:00 pm

Only IGNORANCE says that Islam is to blame for terrorism.

I know many Muslims that are appalled by the extremists.

What Drumpf fails to recognize are the white terrorists on our very soil. Seeing white supremisists on the news glorifying and getting huge support from the Rump presidency is deplorable and depressing.

My grandkids are mixed half African American and other mixes although the look black. I am worried about their future with an unstable, delusional president and his minions in charge.

I never thought after all these years that so much hate could be in power in this nation I defended against such hatred. It is a travesty.
User avatar
Largent80
Legacy
 
Posts: 1745
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 1:38 pm
Location: Tex-ass

Re: President Trump

Postby monkey » Thu Jun 29, 2017 3:00 pm

So he's supposed to NOT fight back, when his fighting back was a big reason his supporters back him?
You know, after the crap CNN has been caught pulling, they need to apologise to the entire nation for all their damnable lies about Trump! Frankly I don't care one little bit that he's tweeting back against these clowns, they've lied, they've rolled out non stop lies about him since before he even got elected, and he can't tweek them back?
Ok... That seems fair. One side gets to completely fabricate entire stories, that are sold as "news", for seven plus months, and the target of those lies can't push back?
I hope he keeps hammering them and hammering them until they disappear completely as a "news"entity, because they are no different than a tabloid, but pretend to be news.
They lie to us constantly, I frankly don't care what Trump says about those liars.

Trump's legacy is going to be, almost completely undoing all the damage Obama did by completely undoing his legacy, and destroying CNN (and hopefully a few other fake news outlets as well) in the process.

Any way you slice it, that is awesome, and great for America. The swamp is being drained, and this is what it looks like.
User avatar
monkey
Legacy
 
Posts: 1777
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2013 8:40 pm

Re: President Trump

Postby Largent80 » Thu Jun 29, 2017 6:58 pm

Ostrich, every word you type is hysterical, seriously. The funniest part is that you believe what you say. Sad to think a tool like you claims to be a seahawk fan.
User avatar
Largent80
Legacy
 
Posts: 1745
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 1:38 pm
Location: Tex-ass

Re: President Trump

Postby RiverDog » Thu Jun 29, 2017 9:59 pm

burrrton wrote:Maybe, but again, it being possible that others could be in a rough situation doesn't make granting preference to a particular religion that is clearly being wiped away an outrageous or unprecedented thing to do.

You make valid points, but it's not completely unreasonable for our immigration process to do what he proposes, either.


For several years, both Syria and ISIS have been using poison gas to kill thousands. Unless you want to argue that the victims in those attacks don't include Muslims, then I think that it's pretty safe to say that there's no "could be" about it. There's little doubt that all people in those areas that are subject to attack are in a "rough situation, not just the Christians. Being that Muslims in Syria outnumber Christians by nearly 10-1, my guess would be that the majority of civilians killed in those gas attacks were Muslims.

Look, I'm all for a rigorous vetting process, and not knowing many details about what we currently have in place, wouldn't be surprised if there's a major need for increasing its intensity. But it has to conform to the Constitution.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: President Trump

Postby burrrton » Fri Jun 30, 2017 4:28 pm

But it has to conform to the Constitution.


One more time, with feeling: it *does*.

Whatever you think of the wisdom of it, or its effectiveness, or its appropriateness, this isn't the first time it's been done, for heaven's sake.

Trump gives us nearly endless things that can/should be criticized- harping on things like this drown out the rest.
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 4213
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: President Trump

Postby RiverDog » Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:46 pm

burrrton wrote:One more time, with feeling: it *does*.

Whatever you think of the wisdom of it, or its effectiveness, or its appropriateness, this isn't the first time it's been done, for heaven's sake.

Trump gives us nearly endless things that can/should be criticized- harping on things like this drown out the rest.


The fact that it was used in the past doesn't necessarily mean that the same initiative would be judged as constitutional today. Otherwise, we'd never have had a Brown v Board of Education decision overturning a previous SC decision declaring separate but equal laws as unconstitutional.

If the Administration's stated goal is genuine, that is, helping those refugees that are at the greatest risk, there's other ways they can grant a preference to them without using a religious filter. But I seriously doubt the President's word when he says he's simply wanting to help those at the most risk. I believe he's looking for a way to keep any and all Muslims from entering the country.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: President Trump

Postby burrrton » Sat Jul 01, 2017 9:13 am

The fact that it was used in the past doesn't necessarily mean that the same initiative would be judged as constitutional today.


I'm not using the fact that it's been done before as *the reason* it's Constitutional. I just wish we'd stick to criticism based in reality, not based on wanting to "stick it to" the guy- I think that self-described impulse is clouding your judgment here.

He gives you plenty of valid things to criticize- this isn't one of them.

I believe he's looking for a way to keep any and all Muslims from entering the country.


Maybe, but if he wanted to ban any and all Muslims from entering the country, he could have EASILY justified adding numerous other countries to this 90-day travel ban.

Instead, it was a temporary pause for *all* people, and only from countries identified by the previous administration as inadequate. Funny way to go about "banning all Muslims".
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 4213
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: President Trump

Postby RiverDog » Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:46 am

burrrton wrote:I'm not using the fact that it's been done before as *the reason* it's Constitutional. I just wish we'd stick to criticism based in reality, not based on wanting to "stick it to" the guy- I think that self-described impulse is clouding your judgment here.


I'm not sure why you'd bring up the fact that it's been done before if not to defend its Constitutionality as the discussion of the EO revolved around its legality. But be that as it may.

As far as my "clouded judgment" goes, my disagreement is more a matter of means than objective. There are a number of issues I agree with DJT on regarding immigration. I've always felt that we do not set the immigration bar high enough, that new citizens should be able to communicate effectively in English, that they be educated enough or have sufficient skills to be self supporting, that they pass a very thorough background check, pass a drug screen, that the simple fact that a person was born here should not automatically make them a citizen, felt that our borders, in particular our southern border, needed to be strengthened, and so on. But I do not agree with building a wall, his demonizing of illegals as nothing but a bunch of thugs, his war on Muslims, and other very caustic, insensitive and divisive positions he's taken.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: President Trump

Postby burrrton » Sat Jul 01, 2017 11:48 am

It's not Constitutional because it's been done before, it's been done before because it's Constitutional. My intent was just to present that as something to ponder.

As far as my "clouded judgment" goes, my disagreement is more a matter of means than objective. There are a number of issues I agree with DJT on regarding immigration. I've always felt that we do not set the immigration bar high enough, that new citizens should be able to communicate effectively in English, that they be educated enough or have sufficient skills to be self supporting, that they pass a very thorough background check, pass a drug screen, that the simple fact that a person was born here should not automatically make them a citizen, felt that our borders, in particular our southern border, needed to be strengthened, and so on. But I do not agree with building a wall, his demonizing of illegals as nothing but a bunch of thugs, his war on Muslims, and other very caustic, insensitive and divisive positions he's taken.


Not much to disagree with there, RD.
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 4213
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: President Trump

Postby RiverDog » Tue Jul 04, 2017 12:32 pm

I'm surprised that no one has commented about Trump's latest antics. Some are using it as evidence of his medical incapacity and invoking the 25th Amendment:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... spartanntp
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: President Trump

Postby c_hawkbob » Tue Jul 04, 2017 12:46 pm

WWE and this POTUS were made for each other; phony as a $3 bill, all style, no substance.
User avatar
c_hawkbob
Legacy
 
Posts: 6941
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 3:34 pm
Location: Paducah Kentucky, 42001

PreviousNext

Return to Off Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 11 guests

cron