Last time I checked there's a review of our vetting practices that's currently underway and we'll likely have an answer to your question when the review is completed. Apparently you think current practices are fine regardless of concerns expressed by the FBI. I personally believe that these concerns should be evaluated and a review of the process is prudent. We disagree...it's as simple as that.
Excellent choices in the President's cabinet for one. His Executive Orders for two. His choice of Supreme Court nominee for three.
Which is worse is an irrelevant argument. Two wrongs don't make a right. In fact, one of the most troubling things these days IMO is that that seems to be the only argument that Republicans have any more. You'll desperately search for some false equivalence (I've never defended Obama for that), and then use it as a phony excuse to cry hypocrisy, when it's really just an excuse for partisanship. It's transparent and it's childish. And the more people see that our entire country is being run by people who think like that, the more worried and the less confident they're going to become.
I understand that. And that the same can be said for almost any judgeship.The supremely court is much more of a political organ given the justices are literally appointed almost entirely for their political views.
I understand that. And that the same can be said for almost any judgeship.
But when it comes to interpretations of the law, I'm going to trust someone who has demonstrated at least some knowledge and understanding of the law over someone who has demonstrated neither of those and is clearly just grandstanding.
Which is worse is an irrelevant argument. Two wrongs don't make a right. In fact, one of the most troubling things these days IMO is that that seems to be the only argument that Republicans have any more. You'll desperately search for some false equivalence (I've never defended Obama for that), and then use it as a phony excuse to cry hypocrisy, when it's really just an excuse for partisanship. It's transparent and it's childish. And the more people see that our entire country is being run by people who think like that, the more worried and the less confident they're going to become.
Give Trump a chance? Who are we to give him a chance? Do you honestly think people have ANY power at all to change what Trump does or doesn't do?
Your owners have got you under control.
They give you a D or an R and you happily accept this nonsense. You vote every cycle and encourage others to vote.
Your owners laugh at you.
The context of my comments were obviously lost on you.Yeah, no. I objected to your post, and you replied to me with:
You say you know my posting history, yet you seem oblivious to my passion about Libya and my disgust over the horrible things we've done there. It's now plain to see that there's really no reason to continue wasting each other's time here.Then you misread my post. I'm not attempting to dehumanize you. I'm simply stating that you clearly have no empathy for the dead in the picture (based on my observation of your post history). You don't post it because you truly care, you post it to score cheap points and to divert from the issues being discussed. Spare us all your crocodile tears.
The party of family values.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/08/us/phoenix-guadalupe-garcia-de-rayos.html?_r=0
Give him a chance, guys.
After getting to know of him over the past year. He's acting exactly as I imagined he would. The best you can say about him is that his behavior and actions really come as no surprise. His personal and business dealings over the last couple decades showed us exactly what sort of a person he is. He is, and always has been, in it for Donald Trump. Winning, profiting and glorification, that's what he wants. And it seems he will run the presidency the same way.
Look at his disdain for an independent judiciary. A key safeguard against tyranny and he attacks it barely two weeks in. That tells you everything about his character and confirms that no, this humbling important role as leader of the free world isn't changing him. He is under a small amount of pressure now and is already reverting to type. And the pressure is only going to get greater as he has to deal with actual, real world events of and not of his own making.
Many people ask what politicians fear most "Events, dear boy, events" I suspect Trump has none of that self-awareness or humility. Even after the crowning achievement of his life, the honor of being elected President of this great country, Trump remains a dreadful human being and the best anyone can hope for is that the constitutional and legal protections built into the system prevent him from doing too much damage.
Those American kids don't need their mother. Fuck 'em! Shoulda picked different parents!
Ok, but realize that your no different than the "other" side. The "other" side thinks you and people you support are just as bad as you think Trump is. There is so much anti-Hillary stuff out there it is crazy. These people call Obama a Muslim, a traitor etc nonstop.I figure if TrumpCo gets called on their lies often enough that they won't be able to take us completely post-truth.
Other than that, you merely preach a different brand of negativity that the Trumpsters.
The context of my comments were obviously lost on you.
You say you know my posting history, yet you seem oblivious to my passion about Libya and my disgust over the horrible things we've done there. It's now plain to see that there's really no reason to continue wasting each other's time here.
Ok, but realize that your no different than the "other" side. The "other" side thinks you and people you support are just as bad as you think Trump is. There is so much anti-Hillary stuff out there it is crazy. These people call Obama a Muslim, a traitor etc nonstop.
Yeah Trump is bad. He might be the worst thing to happen. His winning shows how much humanity has fallen.
But move beyond your partisanship. Look beyond political affiliations. It's much deeper than that.
lol.A federal appeals court on Thursday bluntly rejected President Donald Trump's attempt to revive his controversial travel ban executive order, giving no ground under unusual public pressure from the president himself.
A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Thursday unanimously turned down the Justice Department’s request to lift a Seattle-based judge’s restraining order blocking authorities from carrying out the limits Trump sought to impose on travel to the U.S. by citizens of seven majority-Muslim countries and by refugees from across the globe.
In an unsparing 29-page ruling, the judges said Trump's order appears to deprive many affected foreigners of their rights without providing the legal process the Constitution requires.
"The Government has not shown that the Executive Order provides what due process requires, such as notice and a hearing prior to restricting an individual’s ability to travel. Indeed, the Government does not contend that the Executive Order provides for such process," the 9th Circuit ruling says.
The judges also appeared to bristle at the starkness of some of the legal arguments Justice Department lawyers offered in the case, including a contention that orders such as Trump's should not be subject to scrutiny by the courts.
"The Government has taken the position that the President’s decisions about immigration policy, particularly when motivated by national security concerns, are unreviewable, even if those actions potentially contravene constitutional rights and protections," the court wrote. "There is no precedent to support this claimed unreviewability, which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy....The Supreme Court has repeatedly and explicitly rejected the notion that the political branches have unreviewable authority over immigration or are not subject to the Constitution when policymaking in that context."
The Government has taken the position that the President’s decisions about immigration policy, particularly when motivated by national security concerns, are unreviewable, even if those actions potentially contravene constitutional rights and protections," the court wrote. "There is no precedent to support this claimed unreviewability, which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy....The Supreme Court has repeatedly and explicitly rejected the notion that the political branches have unreviewable authority over immigration or are not subject to the Constitution when policymaking in that context.
It's worth quoting the ruling-
It'll only further the entrenchment of his base in their bunker 'o denial, sad to say. He also gets a scapegoat in the event that such an attack should penetrate our defenses.
The rest? He really doesn't care because he's locked in for 4 years & there's damned little anybody will be able to do about it.
I actually think all these attacks help the country. Every President comes in with a certain amount of political capital that he can use for virtually anything. After that, he needs popular support to act. The attacks on Obama drove him to be more moderate, and hopefully the attacks on Trump will do the same. Not immediately, but eventually Congressional Republicans will feel the heat and be less willing to act except where there is broad bipartisan public support. That can only be a good thing for any President, in my opinion. If something doesn't have broad support, then the government probably shouldn't be doing it. The lone exception off the top of my head would be minority civil rights (like gay marriage) where something may be morally imperative in and of itself but not yet acceptable to the majority. Those are the examples where leaders need to lead us in directions we might otherwise ignore since it isn't our ox being gored. Beyond that, I prefer that our leaders lead us where we all already want to go.What does "give Trump a chance" even mean? We don't have any choice but to give him a chance to be POTUS, because he's legally the POTUS. So far as not criticizing him? Sorry, no. Not only do we have a right of free speech but so far as I'm concerned, we have a civic duty to keep our president honest. What good is there in keeping our mouths shut while a president lies and/or is corrupt? Does "give Trump a chance" mean we wait some fixed amount of time, say 6 months, while he's dishonest and corrupt before pointing it out? Bull.
The party of family values.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/08/us/phoenix-guadalupe-garcia-de-rayos.html?_r=0
Give him a chance, guys.
That woman stole a American citizen's identity...do you know how bad that is, and how much that can mess up the victim's life?? She is a scumbag to do that and deserves to be deported out of here forever, i have seen people who are truely disabled and yet they had to go literally a year or even 2 years with no disability income or even basic help like foodstamps...because their identity was stolen and they had to prove who they are and that takes alot of time. Not to mention cases where if there are warrants out for the person who stole your identity, if you get pulled over for running a red light, well now the police think YOU caused those crimes that have warrants out for you - its a mess. But its so common. The illegals cause far more trouble than just hopping a border in many cases, identity theft is probably the most common damage done to American citizens by illegal aliens.
Also, the economic theft is another factor. Did she collect Welfare and foodstamps using the stolen identity to? She stole directly from American citizens if she did. Did she vote using her fake identity, thereby meddling with our elections? I dont see why she wouldnt be able to.
The attacks on Obama drove him to be more moderate