Politics Thread

[boozehound]

That story is false and the media has run with it. The only guy "quoted" in that story has said that he was misquoted and what he really said isn't what is being reported.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/that-new-york-times-hit-piece-on-perry-was-unsubstantiated-garbage/article/2612311#.WIDUbMBHZKE.twitter



And now New York magazine is question the NYT's story: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/01/the-times-may-have-launched-a-false-rumor-about-rick-perry.html?mid=twitter_nymag

That makes a little more sense. The initial article seemed to go out of it's way to paint Perry as almost comically aloof. I still think he is probably unqualified for that particular role, but at least he knows what role he is being nominated for.

It would be nice if the Media would respond to the criticisms being leveled against them by tightening up their journalistic standards rather than further relaxing them. If you are the NYT and you have Trump all over you for being 'crooked' it would seem that the absolute worst thing you could do would be to continuously get busted running misleading anti-Trump stories.

[boozehound]

I'd say it's better than sending over Jimmy f*cking Carter

Former President Jimmy Carter? Is that a serious statement, or tongue-in-cheek? Just the fact that he is a former President would (in my opinion at least) make him a far more logical individual to send over than a sperm-lucky real estate developer with no foreign policy experience. Political views notwithstanding he has plenty of foreign policy experience. Why don't we just send f*cking Omarosa over to Syria to fix that whole situation while we are at it.

[Xville]

Here are my thoughts on the middle east....they have been fighting for thousands upon thousands of years. What is funny is that this country believes that our intervention is going to permanently stop that fighting. It won't and it never will.

I'm joking here but our attitude toward the south side of Chicago and the Middle East should be about the same...build a wall or dome around it, and let them just kill each other.

[GoMuskies]

Here are my thoughts on the middle east....they have been fighting for thousands upon thousands of years. What is funny is that this country believes that our intervention is going to permanently stop that fighting. It won't and it never will.


Completely agree. Send over Kushner, or send over the most seasoned, experienced, savvy political operative in the country (whoever that may be). Results are likely to be similar.

[Caf]

I'm joking here but our attitude toward the south side of Chicago and the Middle East should be about the same...build a wall or dome around it, and let them just kill each other.

Something is wrong with you.

[boozehound]

Completely agree. Send over Kushner, or send over the most seasoned, experienced, savvy political operative in the country (whoever that may be). Results are likely to be similar.

I don't disagree that they are not going to stop fighting no matter what we do. I'd rather we just stopped interjecting ourselves rather than sending over hilariously unqualified people to intervene as US envoys. In my mind the better thing to do is to pull back.

[Xville]

Something is wrong with you.

Why? Do you have a better solution? South side of Chicago is so bad that police are scared to even take calls, and the ones that do are corrupt beyond belief. The Middle East has been fighting for thousands of years...why not just let them kill each other...they do it anyways without us telling them to do it. Our intervention in the grand scheme of things has done absolutely nothing to that region and it never will...yes there will be peace here and there for a year or so, and then they will start killing each other again. US has wasted trillions upon trillions of dollars on that region with no resolve.

Again I was kidding about the wall or dome, but really what solution do you impose? Does this country continue to spend trillions of dollars on an area of the world whose main focus is killing each other every day?

[muskiefan82]

Not big on Perry or Sessions. They can't all be winners!

Makes me wonder if Charlie Sheen is likely to receive a nomination for something.

[Mrs. Garrett]

Not big on Perry or Sessions. They can't all be winners!

How about just one winner in the bunch?

[ArizonaXUGrad]

No kidding, I just want one slam dunk and so far that has been nobody.


How about just one winner in the bunch?

[paulxu]

Being from South Carolina, I'm watching Haley's deal a little.
She built some cred with difficult decisions in our state, but with the cover of not being able to stand for re-election after her second term.
Not sure she would have been my pick; would have preferred a more seasoned person with international experience for the UN.
But she's handle herself well so far.

I'm not a fan of this president or his picks. Think we are in for some challenging times.

[Caf]

Why? Do you have a better solution? South side of Chicago is so bad that police are scared to even take calls, and the ones that do are corrupt beyond belief. The Middle East has been fighting for thousands of years...why not just let them kill each other...they do it anyways without us telling them to do it. Our intervention in the grand scheme of things has done absolutely nothing to that region and it never will...yes there will be peace here and there for a year or so, and then they will start killing each other again. US has wasted trillions upon trillions of dollars on that region with no resolve.

Again I was kidding about the wall or dome, but really what solution do you impose? Does this country continue to spend trillions of dollars on an area of the world whose main focus is killing each other every day?

Hahah I don't have a solution. That is just the most pessimistic and depressing view I've ever read.

In Israel the 2 state solution seems like the most feasible but I won't hold my breath. And our intervention is actually a big part of why that region is so tumultuous. We are a central reason why Israel is so strong and entrenched.

[Juice]

Former President Jimmy Carter? Is that a serious statement, or tongue-in-cheek? Just the fact that he is a former President would (in my opinion at least) make him a far more logical individual to send over than a sperm-lucky real estate developer with no foreign policy experience. Political views notwithstanding he has plenty of foreign policy experience. Why don't we just send f*cking Omarosa over to Syria to fix that whole situation while we are at it.

He's been sent over there several times and pro-Palestine, and accomplished nothing. His presidency was a disaster, which included the Iran Hostage Crisis. He's a failure.

[GoMuskies]

How about just one winner in the bunch?

I like a lot of them. Mnuchin, Tillerson, Ross, and Haley are all great. I wanted to like DeVos, but I just can't. Right message, wrong person is my initial impression. I am warming to Pruitt.

[Xville]

Hahah I don't have a solution. That is just the most pessimistic and depressing view I've ever read.

In Israel the 2 state solution seems like the most feasible but I won't hold my breath. And our intervention is actually a big part of why that region is so tumultuous. We are a central reason why Israel is so strong and entrenched.

Yeah it is pretty pessimistic, but i think its also reality. I don't think anything America does in that area of the world is going to change anything in the long term. I mean look at Iraq...how long has America spent money in that country and is it any better than what it was 25-30 years ago? Not from what the news has told me...but its hard to tell what is the truth anymore.

[Caf]

Yeah it is pretty pessimistic, but i think its also reality. I don't think anything America does in that area of the world is going to change anything in the long term. I mean look at Iraq...how long has America spent money in that country and is it any better than what it was 25-30 years ago? Not from what the news has told me...but its hard to tell what is the truth anymore.

Umm we changed everything about Iraq in the long term. Did we change it for the better? I guess that depends on who you ask. There are definitely no WMDs there anymore though! Yay!

[Xville]

I'm just glad that in less than 24 hours, America's 8 year nightmare will be over...will it be any better? I don't know but boy am I done with Obama.

Worst GDP Growth
Highest Debt
Slowest Wage Growth
Enemies Don't Fear Us
Allies Don't Trust Us
Complete Drop in Employee Participation because hey why work?

http://nypost.com/2017/01/14/its-time-to-face-facts-obamas-presidency-was-a-failure/

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/435093/barack-obama-economy-jobs-ugly-truth

[Juice]

Umm we changed everything about Iraq in the long term. Did we change it for the better? I guess that depends on who you ask. There are definitely no WMDs there anymore though! Yay!

or an evil dictator in power (yes, that we originally propped up...but yeah...)

[Juice]

I'm just glad that in less than 24 hours, America's 8 year nightmare will be over...will it be any better? I don't know but boy am I done with Obama.

Worst GDP Growth
Highest Debt
Slowest Wage Growth
Enemies Don't Fear Us
Allies Don't Trust Us
Complete Drop in Employee Participation because hey why work?

http://nypost.com/2017/01/14/its-time-to-face-facts-obamas-presidency-was-a-failure/

This is my favorite statistic/fact about the Obama era because liberals always point to the unemployment rate while ignoring the enormous red flag that is the drop in those seeking work/employee participation.

[Caf]

or an evil dictator in power (yes, that we originally propped up...but yeah...)

I don't know about you, but evil dictator might actually be a preferable to what's gone on.

[Xville]

I don't know about you, but evil dictator might actually be a preferable to what's gone on.

The really sad part is that you are probably right which is the problem with that area...too many bad people, too much of a generational mindset that isn't going to change anytime soon.

[X-man]

This is my favorite statistic/fact about the Obama era because liberals always point to the unemployment rate while ignoring the enormous red flag that is the drop in those seeking work/employee participation.

Here is a link to the actual labor force participation rate data for the last 70 years (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/data/CIVPART.txt) in case you are interested in actual data instead of just making shit up.

[X-man]

As the data show, that rate has trended down since the mid-90's. Demographics, i.e. an aging population with an increasing percentage of retirees, explains the data patterns you are seeing.

[Juice]

Here is a link to the actual labor force participation rate data for the last 70 years (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/data/CIVPART.txt) in case you are interested in actual data instead of just making shit up.

So under Obama it started around 66% and ended around 62%? Under Bush it started around 67% and ended at around 66%? Do you realize how important those percentage points are? I think these numbers proved my point.

[Xville]

Here is a link to the actual labor force participation rate data for the last 70 years (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/data/CIVPART.txt) in case you are interested in actual data instead of just making shit up.

Thanks for proving our point...it has dropped abut 4 percent since Obama took office. You realize that is the most significant drop in any presidency right?

[Caf]

So under Obama it started around 66% and ended around 62%? Under Bush it started around 67% and ended at around 66%? Do you realize how important those percentage points are? I think these numbers proved my point.

I'm assuming the baby boomers skew the trend line quite a bit.

[X-man]

I'm assuming the baby boomers skew the trend line quite a bit.

People like Juice and Xville don't want facts to get in the way of their polemical position on this.

[Xville]

I'm not a fan of DeVos (of course), but hey, it's not like education is important. I think Flynn may be the worst pick of the group though - he is borderline dangerous and will play a key role in a department that can get us into wars. I can't say I'm a huge fan of Carson to run HUD, but he probably can't do all that much damage in that role. Mattis seems OK, Pompeo probably won't do anything too crazy, and Tillerson is seeming like a more tolerable pick after the confirmation hearings.

Regarding the nepotism - Don and Eric will be running this business, but I would argue that it seems that Kusher and Ivanka seem poised to play key roles in his administration, even if not formally named to key roles (as they cannot be due to an anti-nepotism law, otherwise I'm sure they would be cabinet level appointees). For example Trump is claiming that Kushner will broker a peace agreement between Israel and Palestine, which seems like a pretty significant task. It also gives us another frightening glimpse into Trump's psyche - the fact that he thinks is publisher and real estate investor son-in-law, with no political experience, is going to broker peace in the middle east shows just how little he knows about foreign policy.

Regarding Ivanka - her role seems to be a little less clear at this point. It sounds like she will function as a de-facto first lady, which is probably fine. I'm not sure how 'great' she is though. She is definitely pretty, but beyond that I don't know a whole lot about her qualifications. She looks pretty great compared to Donald though, I guess.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/dear-mr-president-students-write-letters-president-elect-121506437--abc-news-topstories.html#

This is the kind of thing our schools are teaching our children. Go to your safe spaces children and write a letter to deal with your emotional distress. hank goodness someone that is heavily criticized by the teachers' union is taking over.

[Caf]

People like Juice and Xville don't want facts to get in the way of their polemical position on this.

I'm no economist or professor but I charted the data and the slope dramatically increases in the 70s and early 80s when the boomers started their careers. I hope some politicians made hay with that increase back.

[Xville]

People like Juice and Xville don't want facts to get in the way of their polemical position on this.

this is typical of a liberal...use a big word that no one uses to make yourself sound smart. There are more millennials than baby boomers you know that right? There are quite a few baby boomers who are not near retirement age just as there are quite a few millennials who have yet to reach the job market age. It stands to reason that those numbers balance each other out quite well, but keep pushing that Obama propaganda.

[paulxu]

Guy drives car into 20 foot ditch, leaving it upside down.

Stands around bitching that it takes so long for someone else to haul car out of ditch, repair it, and get it back on the road again.

...so he can drive it away and find another ditch.

[Caf]

this is typical of a liberal...use a big word that no one uses to make yourself sound smart. There are more millennials than baby boomers you know that right? There are quite a few baby boomers who are not near retirement age just as there are quite a few millennials who have yet to reach the job market age. It stands to reason that those numbers balance each other out quite well, but keep pushing that Obama propaganda.

Don't cry partisanship and then throw it back.

Labor force participation is an interesting topic and there's a lot of debate/information on it. It's far from an understood phenomenon let alone one we can blame a President for.

The below is pretty interesting. I haven't gotten to read the whole thing, but it also mentions that women’s labor force participation rates surged in the same time

Labor force projections to 2022: the labor force
participation rate continues to fall - BLS (https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2013/article/pdf/labor-force-projections-to-2022-the-labor-force-participation-rate-continues-to-fall.pdf)

[bobbiemcgee]

Healthcare - The most recent doozy. Trump seems to be pushing for a Healthcare system that is far more inclusive / costly than the ACA. He claims he has it 'almost ready' (which I don't believe for a second). Repealing and replacing the ACA is already politically difficult, the last thing that they need is Trump making promises that they cannot even come close to keeping.


Trump has a magical plan to have "insurance for everybody". Popcorn, please.

[X-man]

this is typical of a liberal...use a big word that no one uses to make yourself sound smart. There are more millennials than baby boomers you know that right? There are quite a few baby boomers who are not near retirement age just as there are quite a few millennials who have yet to reach the job market age. It stands to reason that those numbers balance each other out quite well, but keep pushing that Obama propaganda.
But if you actually read any analysis of what is going on with respect to the labor force participation rate, rather than just throwing out your polemical trash (OMG, there's that "big word that no one uses" again), you would discover that most of the drop in that rate is caused by demographics rather than anything that politicians do. But of course that analysis would violate what you "know" (aka "believe" because it fits with your right-wing world view), and so any such analysis must surely be "fake news", right?

[XUFan09]

No one uses "polemical"? Even though it is a highly appropriate word to describe politics today? Huh.

Really, it's pretty stupid to criticize someone for uses a word that is often learned in high school when we presumably are all college-educated or working towards that tier.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[Xville]

No one uses "polemical"? Even though it is a highly appropriate word to describe politics today? Huh.

Really, it's pretty stupid to criticize someone for uses a word that is often learned in high school when we presumably are all college-educated or working towards that tier.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

First, it's a messageboard. Second, you use that word on a regular basis, really?

[Xville]

But if you actually read any analysis of what is going on with respect to the labor force participation rate, rather than just throwing out your polemical trash (OMG, there's that "big word that no one uses" again), you would discover that most of the drop in that rate is caused by demographics rather than anything that politicians do. But of course that analysis would violate what you "know" (aka "believe" because it fits with your right-wing world view), and so any such analysis must surely be "fake news", right?

Liberals always with their excuses. What is your excuse for the slowest gdp growth since world word Ii, or the slowest wage growth? Must be those damn demographics again.

[XUFan09]

First, it's a messageboard. Second, you use that word on a regular basis, really?
It's a message board of educated people and you were trying to win "argument points" over the fact that he used a somewhat less common word. It was a stupid tangent. Also, when did I say that I used the word on a regular basis? I said that it was a word often learned in high school and it was a word highly appropriate to politics today. The conclusions you reach are rather strange sometimes...

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[X-man]

Liberals always with their excuses. What is your excuse for the slowest gdp growth since world word Ii, or the slowest wage growth? Must be those damn demographics again.

It's called the Bush recession if you must know.

[Xville]

It's called the Bush recession if you must know.

Haha i knew you would have one. You realize that usually after recessions America has had some of its biggest gdp growth right? Except during obama of course.

[X-man]

Haha i knew you would have one. You realize that usually after recessions America has had some of its biggest gdp growth right? Except during obama of course.

Of course the reason in this case is that the Republican "deficit hawks" (you know, the ones who are fine with Trump deficits but refused to accept Obama's fiscal policy proposals) held down the speed of the recovery.

[paulxu]

Guy drives car into 20 foot ditch, leaving it upside down.

Stands around bitching that it takes so long for someone else to haul car out of ditch, repair it, and get it back on the road again.

...so he can drive it away and find another ditch.

Bump

[GoMuskies]

Bump

Is this about South Carolina football?

[Caf]

Haha i knew you would have one. You realize that usually after recessions America has had some of its biggest gdp growth right? Except during obama of course.

What do you think would have gotten us out of a recession faster? He had a stimulus package gutted to the point of non-existence. It's fine to blame Obama for the dysfunction, some of it he did to himself. However, it's ridiculous not to at least acknowledge that Congress has been at it's worst in his Presidency.

You can make an argument that Obamacare was a drag on the economy, but it would certainly be overstated. I think the economic policies were largely a failure, the main issue being how the bailouts were more friendly to business than citizens. A lot of that was settled under Bush though.

[Juice]

Ahhh yes, Women's rights https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/822445494211375104

[paulxu]

Is this about South Carolina football?

It sure could be.

[Xville]

Ahhh yes, Women's rights https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/822445494211375104

looks a lot like the Mizzou "protests" of last year..wonder when Ms. carrot top will show up.

[GoMuskies]

So that just happened.

[American X]

Peaceful transition of power - AmX Approved.

[xudash]

I can't help you if you have a problem with that acceptance speech.

[American X]

If you had 'American' in the Inaugural Speech Drinking Game, I hope you recover quickly from your coma.

[Caf]

I can't help you if you have a problem with that acceptance speech.

Help me! Please!

[Juice]

I forget, was all this shit going on when Obama, Clinton, etc. were inaugurated?
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2017/01/20/day-protests-arrests-expected-trump-becomes-president/96788208/

[Juice]

People have lost their god damn minds https://twitter.com/itvnews/status/822514006518853632

[JTG]

I forget, was all this shit going on when Obama, Clinton, etc. were inaugurated?
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2017/01/20/day-protests-arrests-expected-trump-becomes-president/96788208/
Probably not because Republicans don't act like spoiled children

[Caf]

Probably not because Republicans don't act like spoiled children

I forget, was all this going on when Bush, Bush, and Reagan etc. were inaugurated? I live in DC and hate these rioters as much as anyone, but this is something other than typical liberalism.

[drudy23]

People have lost their god damn minds https://twitter.com/itvnews/status/822514006518853632

LOL...how can u not laugh?

[Juice]

I forget, was all this going on when Bush, Bush, and Reagan etc. were inaugurated? I live in DC and hate these rioters as much as anyone, but this is something other than typical liberalism.

Right, it's liberalism taken to a next level. It's liberalism that feels it can't be touched because they've been allowed to act like children for years. How much bullshit did we have to hear about the evil Tea Partiers and how they're dangerous, blah blah? And each Obama victory amounted to little if no violence/riots.

This is bullshit. These people don't care about freedom, or civil liberties, or America. All they care about is getting their way. They're cowards.

And neither party is innocent. I've read reports of Trump supporters saying awful shit to people today but they aren't assaulting people, they aren't destroying property, and they aren't crying on TV.

https://twitter.com/MattBrooksWP/status/822526702597316608

https://twitter.com/ABC7News/status/822514851293659136

[Juice]

LOL...how can u not laugh?

I was legitimately laughing out loud in my office.

http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/southpark/images/e/e9/ScottTenormanMustDie30.gif/revision/latest?cb=20100318024246

[Caf]

Right, it's liberalism taken to a next level. It's liberalism that feels it can't be touched because they've been allowed to act like children for years. How much bullshit did we have to hear about the evil Tea Partiers and how they're dangerous, blah blah? And each Obama victory amounted to little if no violence/riots.

This is bullshit. These people don't care about freedom, or civil liberties, or America. All they care about is getting their way. They're cowards.

And neither party is innocent. I've read reports of Trump supporters saying awful shit to people today but they aren't assaulting people, they aren't destroying property, and they aren't crying on TV.

https://twitter.com/MattBrooksWP/status/822526702597316608

https://twitter.com/ABC7News/status/822514851293659136

I agree. I can't stand any of them. The sad/ironic part is they put their own movements back every time they do this.

[Juice]

I agree. I can't stand any of them. The sad/ironic part is they put their own movements back every time they do this.

I didn't even vote for Trump and they've pushed me to the point where I'm actually rooting for the guy.

[Xville]

People have lost their god damn minds https://twitter.com/itvnews/status/822514006518853632

this makes me so happy. I can't contain my excitement.

[Caf]

I didn't even vote for Trump and they've pushed me to the point where I'm actually rooting for the guy.

Interesting tweet from John Weaver. I don't necessarily agree or disagree but it's interesting coming from a GOP operative.

@JWGOP: These anarchists would be doing the same thing if HRC had won. Tiresome.

[GoMuskies]

Agree Juice, I've never been a Trump for President guy, but the meltdowns I've seen definitely have me warming to him. Should be interesting (and at times fun).

[xudash]

I forget, was all this going on when Bush, Bush, and Reagan etc. were inaugurated? I live in DC and hate these rioters as much as anyone, but this is something other than typical liberalism.

You can't possibly be serious. This is liberalism acting in its purest form.

And what help do you need Re the speech?

You don't understand the call for unity? Controlling government largesse (i.e. both parties, lobbyists, controlling interests), putting Americans and American interests first.

The snowflakes who are rioting and losing it are making fools of themselves.

What's wrong with "when you open your heart to patriotism there is no room for prejudice"?

[ArizonaXUGrad]

The rioting is nuts. Seriously, the people out there who are taking sides like it's sports teams is ridiculous. I have conservative friends who do this (UC friends also), when the Pub wins they gloat/dance/etc. I tell them the same thing every time....you didn't win anything. The candidate won an election and you still have to go to your job, you should be hoping he governs accordingly instead you dancing and gloating like some damn fool. I was an Obama voter and I was pleased he won, however, I hoped that he actually governed in a progressive way (which he did some and didn't do some).

All this ignorant talk of tears and snowflakes is both childish and counterproductive. The ones poking fun of it are as bad as the ones doing it.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Agree Juice, I've never been a Trump for President guy, but the meltdowns I've seen definitely have me warming to him. Should be interesting (and at times fun).

I too am annoyed by the meltdown, however, I can't get past the confirmation hearings of his cabinet members. Not one slam dunk, I can't get behind any of those guys some are just outright stupid picks. Drain the swamp and fill it right back up. Granted, Obama left me wanting more from several his people.

[Juice]

The rioting is nuts. Seriously, the people out there who are taking sides like it's sports teams is ridiculous. I have conservative friends who do this (UC friends also), when the Pub wins they gloat/dance/etc. I tell them the same thing every time....you didn't win anything. The candidate won an election and you still have to go to your job, you should be hoping he governs accordingly instead you dancing and gloating like some damn fool. I was an Obama voter and I was pleased he won, however, I hoped that he actually governed in a progressive way (which he did some and didn't do some).

All this ignorant talk of tears and snowflakes is both childish and counterproductive. The ones poking fun of it are as bad as the ones doing it.

We are just as bad? We are just as bad as the people shitting in their own hands? https://twitter.com/montydraxel/status/822478138185814016
Want to rethink that statement?

[Caf]

We are just as bad? We are just as bad as the people shitting in their own hands? https://twitter.com/montydraxel/status/822478138185814016
Want to rethink that statement?

This is a game no one wins. What party is the KKK or the Westboro Baptist Church part of? Terrible people are pretty evenly spread across the masses.

[xudash]

The rioting is nuts. Seriously, the people out there who are taking sides like it's sports teams is ridiculous. I have conservative friends who do this (UC friends also), when the Pub wins they gloat/dance/etc. I tell them the same thing every time....you didn't win anything. The candidate won an election and you still have to go to your job, you should be hoping he governs accordingly instead you dancing and gloating like some damn fool. I was an Obama voter and I was pleased he won, however, I hoped that he actually governed in a progressive way (which he did some and didn't do some).

All this ignorant talk of tears and snowflakes is both childish and counterproductive. The ones poking fun of it are as bad as the ones doing it.

Nice try. And total fail on your part.

I'm not gloating. The man gave a speech aimed at ALL Americans.

The very fact that you went down this road puts you in the same bag as your friends on PA AVE that have pictures of Trump with Swastikas over his eyes.

[Caf]

Nice try. And total fail on your part.

I'm not gloating. The man gave a speech aimed at ALL Americans.

The very fact that you went down this road puts you in the same bag as your friends on PA AVE that have pictures of Trump with Swastikas over his eyes.

You can't force people to like a speech, man. You’re telling an American, who didn’t like the speech, that it was for all Americans. It doesn’t work that way. He's a President of all Americans now and I think he only spoke to his supporters with that speech.

[bobbiemcgee]

Short, dark and negative.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Do you lack reading comprehension skills?

I will break this down for you....

Vote for your guy, guy loses or wins, hope the winner governs well. There you go, simple terms. This is how it should be and I think once was.


Nice try. And total fail on your part.

I'm not gloating. The man gave a speech aimed at ALL Americans.

The very fact that you went down this road puts you in the same bag as your friends on PA AVE that have pictures of Trump with Swastikas over his eyes.

[paulxu]

Probably not because Republicans don't act like spoiled children

Unless they are congressmen from South Carolina.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v358/AlexClarke/JOE_WILSON_YOU_LIE.jpg

On a side note about the speech, he used the phrase "America First." Maybe more than once.
Apparently that has historic meaning going back to an anti-semitic feeling, pushed by a group, often associated with Charles Lindbergh, who were against the Jews and did not want us to enter WWII.

[paulxu]

We are just as bad? We are just as bad as the people shitting in their own hands? https://twitter.com/montydraxel/status/822478138185814016
Want to rethink that statement?

What the chance that tweet has the same validity as this one did? Have no idea if it's really happening, but I do know people are really gullible.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/ishmaeldaro/pooping-hoax?utm_term=.spP0gWYp3#.jq1RWJO4j

[GoMuskies]

On a side note about the speech, he used the phrase "America First." Maybe more than once.
Apparently that has historic meaning going back to an anti-semitic feeling, pushed by a group, often associated with Charles Lindbergh, who were against the Jews and did not want us to enter WWII.

Trump is definitely anti-Ivanka.

[xudash]

Do you lack reading comprehension skills?

I will break this down for you....

Vote for your guy, guy loses or wins, hope the winner governs well. There you go, simple terms. This is how it should be and I think once was.

Do you lack short term memory? You also typed this:

All this ignorant talk of tears and snowflakes is both childish and counterproductive. The ones poking fun of it are as bad as the ones doing it.

I hope he governs well, too.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

I really can't wait until things calm down. I guess 90 days ought to cover it, but what are the odds this is enough. It's time to just sit back and see what he does, and judge from there. All we have so far is a bunch of empty rhetoric and some comically bad cabinet choices. Actually and ironically, more of the same past few decades.

[xudash]

You can't force people to like a speech, man. You’re telling an American, who didn’t like the speech, that it was for all Americans. It doesn’t work that way. He's a President of all Americans now and I think he only spoke to his supporters with that speech.

I provided my opinion on the speech.

You heard what you wanted to hear.

The proof will be in what transpires beginning Monday.

[GoMuskies]

The proof will be in what transpires beginning Monday.

He's the GD President of the United States. He'd better not wait for Monday.

And he won't.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Yeah I did, one side shouting neener neener pumpkin eater while the other side cries really is just two sides of stupidity.


Do you lack short term memory? You also typed this:

All this ignorant talk of tears and snowflakes is both childish and counterproductive. The ones poking fun of it are as bad as the ones doing it.

I hope he governs well, too.

[Juice]

This is a game no one wins. What party is the KKK or the Westboro Baptist Church part of? Terrible people are pretty evenly spread across the masses.

I was referring to his statement on my poking fun at it. I'm nothing like these people or the KKK. And I already referred to the Trump supporters saying awful shit today.

But for as disgusting as the Westbrook Church is, they just stand there. They don't assault people. They don't destroy businesses in DCthe day of the inauguration.

[Juice]

Love Trumps hate when they light a limo on fire https://twitter.com/thegoodcarmah/status/822554649584615425

[Juice]

Love Trumps hate when they light a limo on fire https://twitter.com/thegoodcarmah/status/822554649584615425

And when they spit in the face of a police officer https://twitter.com/fox8news/status/822516229239779329

[Juice]

And when they spit in the face of a police officer https://twitter.com/fox8news/status/822516229239779329

Or when they destroy everything in their path https://twitter.com/ten_gop/status/822523211443077121

[ArizonaXUGrad]

This is absolutely awful, but if you want to paint all with one brush I can go ahead and post up a shot of David Duke congratulating Trump today. That brush spreads wide.


Or when they destroy everything in their path https://twitter.com/ten_gop/status/822523211443077121

[CSS85]

This is absolutely awful, but if you want to paint all with one brush I can go ahead and post up a shot of David Duke congratulating Trump today. That brush spreads wide.

The basket of deplorables agree with you that painting all with one brush is not acceptable. I'm verifying my anxiety by watching the anti Obama demonstrations from 2008 and the looting and vandalism and bodily assaults by the Republican conservative wing........

[Juice]

Hahahaha look at these lunatics https://twitter.com/DebraMessing/status/822515882215632896 They won't stop.

I'm going to guess she isn't really a fan of the 10th Amendment and protecting what it says.

[Juice]

And they're punching people https://twitter.com/TheeCurrentYear/status/822584853661184000 Of course the coward had to 1) sucker punch someone while not even knocking them out and 2) covering their faces.

[Juice]

And don't you dare try to put the fires out that other people caused because leftists will steal your hat and assault you https://twitter.com/AJVicens/status/822559461562781698

[Xville]

I loved trumps speech because it wasnt full of the typical political bs that we have heard over and over from past presidents. It was raw and uncompromising which to me was quite refreshing. It was also a big middle finger to both political parties and the eatablishment that has crippled this country in many ways.

His speech reflected why he won the prwsidency..people are tired of the same old bs.

[Juice]

Women's Rights https://twitter.com/CounterMoonbat/status/822642573734977536

[GoMuskies]

People suck so very badly.

[bobbiemcgee]

I loved trumps speech because it wasnt full of the typical political bs that we have heard over and over from past presidents. It was raw and uncompromising which to me was quite refreshing. It was also a big middle finger to both political parties and the eatablishment that has crippled this country in many ways.

Damn eatablishments. I am never going out to eat again. According to trump's speech, America is apparently a hell hole anyway. Stay home.

[waggy]

http://media.salon.com/2012/06/adelson_rect.jpg

[Xville]

Damn eatablishments. I am never going out to eat again. According to trump's speech, America is apparently a hell hole anyway. Stay home.

Anything you disagree with? Is this country and its people better than say 25 years ago?

[Juice]

Women's rights now include wanting to blow up the White House. Got it.

https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedNews/status/822895795942916097

[bobbiemcgee]

Tame compared to the sixties. We survived that, guess we can survive Trump. We've had chronic and habitual liars before as President.

[Tu 4 MVP]

Trump's obsession with the amount of people that attended the inauguration is really strange. Dude goes to the CIA today and stands in front of their memorial wall with stars for the fallen employees and instead of honoring them or anything of the sort, goes on a rant about the media lying about the crowd sizes. Then his Press Secretary, in his first official press conference, focuses on the numbers again and claims the white tarps just made it look like there wasn't as many people there. Really unbelievable to watch.

[X-man]

Trump's obsession with the amount of people that attended the inauguration is really strange. Dude goes to the CIA today and stands in front of their memorial wall with stars for the fallen employees and instead of honoring them or anything of the sort, goes on a rant about the media lying about the crowd sizes. Then his Press Secretary, in his first official press conference, focuses on the numbers again and claims the white tarps just made it look like there wasn't as many people there. Really unbelievable to watch.

Trump will be impeached before the end of this year. He's nuts, and dangerous. He demonstrates daily that he is temperamentally incapable of carrying out the duties of the POTUS.

[GoMuskies]

With Republican control of Congress, impeaching Trump would make about as much sense as it made to impeach Clinton back in the day.

[X-man]

With Republican control of Congress, impeaching Trump would make about as much sense as it made to impeach Clinton back in the day.

Of course it will be the Republicans who impeach Trump. Ask yourself this: who would Republicans...Pres. Trump or Pres. Pence? All they need is an excuse, and Trump provides them daily. Yesterday's "presser" by Spicer was not only bizarre but chilling given the veiled threats against the free press. Let's face it; Trump's love of Putie is both heartfelt and philosophical. No wonder Trump wants to see the US have military-style parades like those in Russia and North Korea.

[American X]

Short, dark and negative.

What is Mick Cronin?

[boozehound]

Anything you disagree with? Is this country and its people better than say 25 years ago?

There are large groups of people who probably do feel that they are better off than they were 25 or even 45 years ago. Women and minorities are 2 likely candidates. I was 9 years old 25 years ago, so it seems great to me, but I'll bet that people who were in a different position at that time may have differing perspectives. Regardless, I don't think we are going to be able to go back in time, no matter how much we would like to.

The biggest issue I have with this nostalgic line of rhetoric is that by failing to accurately define the problem(s) you deny yourself the opportunity to solve them. For example: focusing on blaming immigrants and globalization rather than our inability to re-train ourselves to be more competitive in the global economy. If you believe in conservative economic principles, you believe that protectionism won't work. Focusing on churning out engineers and software developers. Invest in R&D.

I run a fairly large business unit that is a part of a fairly large corporation. I have 10% of the staff I would have had 25 years ago. It's not because of jobs going overseas (my industry is almost wholly domestic), it's because of computers. My company's factories have 10% the number of employees that they would have 25 years ago. It's not because anything is being produced overseas, it's because of mechanization.

That's not to say that we can't improve on our current economic policy - enforcing intellectual property rights with China is a big example of an area in which I feel we can improve. Investing in R&D doesn't do you as much good if you then ship production to China and they steal your IP. This seems to be one of the few bright spots for me in Trump's proposed policy shifts.

None of this matters, of course, when the President is laser-focused on convincing people that the crowds at his inauguration weren't smaller than the last guy's crowds.

[GoMuskies]

Of course it will be the Republicans who impeach Trump. Ask yourself this: who would Republicans...Pres. Trump or Pres. Pence? All they need is an excuse, and Trump provides them daily. Yesterday's "presser" by Spicer was not only bizarre but chilling given the veiled threats against the free press. Let's face it; Trump's love of Putie is both heartfelt and philosophical. No wonder Trump wants to see the US have military-style parades like those in Russia and North Korea.

You've gone looney tunes like Ashley Judd.

[X-man]

You've gone looney tunes like Ashley Judd.
Ah, the trenchant kind of analysis we have come to expect from you. Thanks for playing.

[GoMuskies]

Who let LH in here?

[Xville]

Of course it will be the Republicans who impeach Trump. Ask yourself this: who would Republicans...Pres. Trump or Pres. Pence? All they need is an excuse, and Trump provides them daily. Yesterday's "presser" by Spicer was not only bizarre but chilling given the veiled threats against the free press. Let's face it; Trump's love of Putie is both heartfelt and philosophical. No wonder Trump wants to see the US have military-style parades like those in Russia and North Korea.

I really hope you dont believe this stuff. If you do, i suggest checking in to the nearest mental facility.

[xudash]

What is Mick Cronin?

Ha!

Thank you. Well done.

[X-man]

I really hope you dont believe this stuff. If you do, i suggest checking in to the nearest mental facility.

Why? Trump is a disaster for Republicans, and they have to be looking for any reason to replace him with a more mainstream (and mature) politician...like Pence. Yesterday's "performance" by Spicer was ridiculous and dangerous and today, Conway piled on. It's only a matter of time.

[xu82]

What is Mick Cronin?

A tiny gnome that strikes fear in barnyard animals everywhere. They have a 6th sense about these things.

[LA Muskie]

Why? Trump is a disaster for Republicans, and they have to be looking for any reason to replace him with a more mainstream (and mature) politician...like Pence. Yesterday's "performance" by Spicer was ridiculous and dangerous and today, Conway piled on. It's only a matter of time.

If you haven't noticed it yet, as a group rank-and-file Republicans are TERRIFIED of Trump and his "movement" right now. The old guard (John McCain and Lindsay Graham) couldn't even convince their cohorts to form an independent committee to investigate potential Russian involvement in the election.

And those who aren't terrified are opportunistic.

Either way, absent a bombshell or a major screwup (both of which are distinct possibilities) that would tie their hands, I don't see impeachment in the cards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GoMuskies]

If you haven't noticed it yet, as a group rank-and-file Republicans are TERRIFIED of Trump and his "movement" right now.

And they just got finished being utterly humiliated by him in the primary. If they touch Trump, they're completely fucked with a large portion of their base. The Republican establishment may not like Trump, but they love being in power (or at least closer to it than they've been the last 8 years). Mess with Trump, and whatever power and momentum they currently have goes away with a quickness.

[Caf]

Why? Trump is a disaster for Republicans, and they have to be looking for any reason to replace him with a more mainstream (and mature) politician...like Pence. Yesterday's "performance" by Spicer was ridiculous and dangerous and today, Conway piled on. It's only a matter of time.

I honestly think Spicer will be thrown under the bus and fired relatively quickly.

[paulxu]

I honestly think Spicer will be thrown under the bus and fired relatively quickly.

Don't think so. That would acknowledge he was spouting nonsense. They never do that.

[Caf]

Don't think so. That would acknowledge he was spouting nonsense. They never do that.

The level of outrage over falsehoods is about to skyrocket now that he's actually President. However I have to acknowledge that I have no clue what they're going to do.

[boozehound]

The level of outrage over falsehoods is about to skyrocket now that he's actually President. However I have to acknowledge that I have no clue what they're going to do.

He is saying the exact same thing as the President though, so I would think it would be hard to throw someone under the bus for saying the same thing their boss, The President, is saying.

I'll tell you one thing though, MY level of outrage over the falsehoods is definitely getting higher. I find it insanely maddening to watch these people clearly lying about things that are provably false. I sort of understand it with Trump because I think he has a legitimate personality disorder that distorts his view of reality, but to watch Spicer and Conway get up there and repeatedly tell bald faced lies about trivial things is insane to me.

[cutterX]

I heard Spicer trained for his gig by watching tapes of Baghdad Bob!!

[bobbiemcgee]

Patient Freedom Obamacare replacement sez you can keep Obamacare. Huh?

[Juice]

Jesus


Gregory Korte ‏@gregorykorte
National debt on Inauguration Day:
1993: $4,188,092,107,184
2001: $5,727,776,738,305
2009: $10,626,877,048,913
2017: $19,947,304,555,212

[xu82]

jesus

priority #!

[GoMuskies]

Old bag demands safe space from Trump supporter on airplane. Instead gets her own personal escort to the terminal: http://www.theamericanmirror.com/video-passengers-cheer-woman-berating-trump-supporter-kicked-off-plane/

Idaho Democrat wants to be DNC chair. Campaigns by saying her job is to "shut other white people down": https://news.grabien.com/story-dnc-chair-candidates-bash-white-people-racially-charged-foru

What a world.

[Juice]

Old bag demands safe space from Trump supporter on airplane. Instead gets her own personal escort to the terminal: http://www.theamericanmirror.com/video-passengers-cheer-woman-berating-trump-supporter-kicked-off-plane/

Idaho Democrat wants to be DNC chair. Campaigns by saying her job is to "shut other white people down": https://news.grabien.com/story-dnc-chair-candidates-bash-white-people-racially-charged-foru

What a world.

In regards to that second story, they haven't learned shit from the election.

[bobbiemcgee]

Idaho Democrat wants to be DNC chair. Campaigns by saying her job is to "shut other white people down"

Sounds like the Fox News gal does too.

[boozehound]

Jesus

Looks like we are on pace for about $38T by 2024. I think we are up to the task. Layer in some Trump tax cuts with expanded healthcare and a massive infrastructure spending program and I'm confident we can at least get to $30T.


In regards to that second story, they haven't learned shit from the election.

I figured that out when they reelected Pelosi as minority leader.

[X-man]

Looks like we are on pace for about $38T by 2024. I think we are up to the task. Layer in some Trump tax cuts with expanded healthcare and a massive infrastructure spending program and I'm confident we can at least get to $30T.



I figured that out when they reelected Pelosi as minority leader.
You might wish to recheck your sources on this one. The CBO begs to differ. Mind you I am not saying that the CBO projections released today are not a source of concern. I simply am suggesting that the debt growth is not nearly as much as you claim and the CBO estimates are over a 10-year period rather than a 7-year period as you claim.

[boozehound]

You might wish to recheck your sources on this one. The CBO begs to differ. Mind you I am not saying that the CBO projections released today are not a source of concern. I simply am suggesting that the debt growth is not nearly as much as you claim and the CBO estimates are over a 10-year period rather than a 7-year period as you claim.

You do realize that was a sarcastic post in response to Juice's post about the National Debt on Inauguration Day. I was referencing the fact that the debt has virtually doubled every 8 years since 2001. If that trend holds we would be looking at a doubling of $19T to $38T in 2024 (2025 really, because Inauguration Day is in Jan).

I do think we can easily get to $30T by 2025 though. I doubt that the CBO estimate fully captures the damage that (I think) the Trump administration will do to the National Debt through tax cuts, military and defense spending, and infrastructure spending. We might not have to worry about CBO estimates for long either. Isn't the Trump administration talking about getting rid of the CBO?

Make America Great Again!

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought Trump's idea of infrastructure went through the his private sector friends. Basically convince the private sector to build roads/bridges and pay them back via tax credits who could then charge us tolls if they so desire.

I thought what a fantastic idea, nothing I want more than to be charged to drive on roads on my way to work more than I am through my gas taxes.


You do realize that was a sarcastic post in response to Juice's post about the National Debt on Inauguration Day. I was referencing the fact that the debt has virtually doubled every 8 years since 2001. If that trend holds we would be looking at a doubling of $19T to $38T in 2024 (2025 really, because Inauguration Day is in Jan).

I do think we can easily get to $30T by 2025 though. I doubt that the CBO estimate fully captures the damage that (I think) the Trump administration will do to the National Debt through tax cuts, military and defense spending, and infrastructure spending. We might not have to worry about CBO estimates for long either. Isn't the Trump administration talking about getting rid of the CBO?

Make America Great Again!

[X-man]

You do realize that was a sarcastic post in response to Juice's post about the National Debt on Inauguration Day. I was referencing the fact that the debt has virtually doubled every 8 years since 2001. If that trend holds we would be looking at a doubling of $19T to $38T in 2024 (2025 really, because Inauguration Day is in Jan).

I do think we can easily get to $30T by 2025 though. I doubt that the CBO estimate fully captures the damage that (I think) the Trump administration will do to the National Debt through tax cuts, military and defense spending, and infrastructure spending. We might not have to worry about CBO estimates for long either. Isn't the Trump administration talking about getting rid of the CBO?

Make America Great Again!
I agree with you on what Trump's policies might do to the growth rate of the debt. And I suppose that getting rid of the CBO is just one part of "draining the swamp".

[Xville]

Im just glad that obama released 221 million to palestine in one of his last acts as president. I mean what better way to use that kind of money. That last act basically just summed up his entire presidency. What a joke.

[xubrew]

This thread confirms my belief that we are all completely screwed and it is collectively our fault.

[Caf]

Im just glad that obama released 221 million to palestine in one of his last acts as president. I mean what better way to use that kind of money. That last act basically just summed up his entire presidency. What a joke.

Obama Stayed Out of the Swamp, and That Hurt Him - Bloomberg (https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-01-20/obama-stayed-out-of-the-swamp-and-that-hurt-him)

This is the best analysis/summation of the Obama Presidency I've read yet. I really recommend it. The below quote perfectly describes the philosophy he carried. I think the release to Palestine is an example of it.


I suspect that Obama fell prey to the worst delusion that we bookish intellectuals cherish, which is that History has a side, and we’re on it.

[boozehound]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought Trump's idea of infrastructure went through the his private sector friends. Basically convince the private sector to build roads/bridges and pay them back via tax credits who could then charge us tolls if they so desire.

I thought what a fantastic idea, nothing I want more than to be charged to drive on roads on my way to work more than I am through my gas taxes.

He did say that, but I don't believe him.

I actually don't really care about some spending against infrastructure. We need it, and it creates jobs for Americans. I don't like the idea of privatizing infrastructure. That's one of a limited list of things that I think belongs with the Federal and State governments.

[GoMuskies]

It depends on what kind of infrastructure, though. Infrastructure is a super broad term. I think, for example, that the pipelines should be private. But I don't want privately owned "public" roads and bridges.

[boozehound]

It depends on what kind of infrastructure, though. Infrastructure is a super broad term. I think, for example, that the pipelines should be private. But I don't want privately owned "public" roads and bridges.

Agreed. When I refer to 'infrastructure' I'm referring to roads, bridges, and other publicly-used things.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Yeah so it was aid and it was also approved by Congress. You are trolling here.


Im just glad that obama released 221 million to palestine in one of his last acts as president. I mean what better way to use that kind of money. That last act basically just summed up his entire presidency. What a joke.

[boozehound]

Yeah so it was aid and it was also approved by Congress. You are trolling here.

I'm not sure that he is trolling (at least not intentionally). I think he's probably pretty bent out of ship about that $221MM of humanitarian aid.

[GoMuskies]

Looks like Trump's State Department is trying to hold up the $221M to Palestine. The aid may not make it there after all.

[Xville]

Yeah so it was aid and it was also approved by Congress. You are trolling here.

Its cute that you think that money would actually be aid for the people of palestine. Members of Congress put a.hold on it because oh yeah palestine is corrupt. We might as well have put the 221 million in a trash bin and set it on fire...same thing...aid thats hysterical

[ArizonaXUGrad]

I believe the count was 2 members of Congress and why did Congress approve it in the first place.

Second, I am going to guess you have no idea what is truly going on between Israel and Palestine. Israel has no intention of ever letting Palestine become a true sovereign nation. I wish they would just come out and say it, at this point instead of insisting on acting like their overlords.

There are Palestinians that are just awful, but Israel controls basic services to Palestine like electricity and water. If they decide they don't like the behavior over in Palestine, they can just flip those switches to 'off'.


Its cute that you think that money would actually be aid for the people of palestine. Members of Congress put a.hold on it because oh yeah palestine is corrupt. We might as well have put the 221 million in a trash bin and set it on fire...same thing...aid thats hysterical

[Xville]

I believe the count was 2 members of Congress and why did Congress approve it in the first place.

Second, I am going to guess you have no idea what is truly going on between Israel and Palestine. Israel has no intention of ever letting Palestine become a true sovereign nation. I wish they would just come out and say it, at this point instead of insisting on acting like their overlords.

There are Palestinians that are just awful, but Israel controls basic services to Palestine like electricity and water. If they decide they don't like the behavior over in Palestine, they can just flip those switches to 'off'.

True liberal...defend palestine. Ill stand with israel who is our ally or was until Obama got ahold of them.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

So yeah, you have no idea what is going on over there. Palestinians are a-holes for sure, but Israel is doing next to nothing to deescalate the situation.

I have an idea that not many who are posting on this thread have any idea what Obama did for this country. Do you even remember 8 years ago? We were operating day-to-day. You might like what he did, but he got us out of that. Now some of his solutions created more problems, but hands down we are better off now than 8 years ago and to say otherwise is either ignorant or ignoring facts.

Also, his 8 years of foreign policy definitely has mistakes. I am sure that same group forgot, he inherited two wars. He ended both, but then inherited the very instability the CIA warned Bush about in the first place. In the end, he didn't escalate any situation any farther than it had to. He didn't enter into any massive armed conflict either. All this and also Russian sanctions are working today, whether Trump rescinds them or not is yet to be seen.

You can gripe all you want and proclaim Trump as the second coming, but in the end you are just ignoring the truth.


True liberal...defend palestine. Ill stand with israel who is our ally or was until Obama got ahold of them.

[Xville]

So yeah, you have no idea what is going on over there. Palestinians are a-holes for sure, but Israel is doing next to nothing to deescalate the situation.

I have an idea that not many who are posting on this thread have any idea what Obama did for this country. Do you even remember 8 years ago? We were operating day-to-day. You might like what he did, but he got us out of that. Now some of his solutions created more problems, but hands down we are better off now than 8 years ago and to say otherwise is either ignorant or ignoring facts.

Also, his 8 years of foreign policy definitely has mistakes. I am sure that same group forgot, he inherited two wars. He ended both, but then inherited the very instability the CIA warned Bush about in the first place. In the end, he didn't escalate any situation any farther than it had to. He didn't enter into any massive armed conflict either. All this and also Russian sanctions are working today, whether Trump rescinds them or not is yet to be seen.

You can gripe all you want and proclaim Trump as the second coming, but in the end you are just ignoring the truth.

Ha your version of the truth. You saying the sanctions have worked is all i need to know that you have no clue and live in a safe space somewhere.

[Lloyd Braun]

Im just glad that obama released 221 million to palestine in one of his last acts as president. I mean what better way to use that kind of money. That last act basically just summed up his entire presidency. What a joke.

Then you really must be pissed about the $10Billion+ for a f***ing wall

[GoMuskies]

Then you really must be pissed about the $10Billion+ for a f***ing wall

The wall belongs in our epic WTF thread.

[Masterofreality]

Then you really must be pissed about the $10Billion+ for a f***ing wall

Don't worry. The "Money from Mexico" will be derived from the confiscated billions from El Chapo.

He's allegedly worth a cool $14 billion.

[Masterofreality]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought Trump's idea of infrastructure went through the his private sector friends. Basically convince the private sector to build roads/bridges and pay them back via tax credits who could then charge us tolls if they so desire.

I thought what a fantastic idea, nothing I want more than to be charged to drive on roads on my way to work more than I am through my gas taxes.

Amazing how that is exactly what Liberal Canada did. Ever drive on the fully privately funded and tollled 407 north of Toronto? Genius.

Canada got a group of investors from Mexico to build a whole new expressway north of the incredibly congested 401. And it is working beautifully. It is totally electronic toll so if you're a Yank like me, they take a pic of your license plate and send you a bill. Great highway with good design and a real time saver.

You do realize that driving on toll roads is also the go to move in NY, Chicago, New Jersey, and almost all of New England. At least with a new road funded the Canada way, there isn't a capital expenditure required from the state.

[Lloyd Braun]

The $10billion estimate is "conservative" (see what I did there?)... it's likely in the $25-$30billion range. But I will gladly take $14B from el chapo. That's one bad hombre!

[Juice]

Then you really must be pissed about the $10Billion+ for a f***ing wall

Why did Obama lend money to Jordan to keep ISIS out of their country? Why did he give money to Mexico for their border with Guatemala? I guess he believed in walls too.

[Lloyd Braun]

Why did Obama lend money to Jordan to keep ISIS out of their country? Why did he give money to Mexico for their border with Guatemala? I guess he believed in walls too.

Yea Obama loves walls! Wtf does this post even mean? Are you implying ISIS will come through the Mexican border?

[Juice]

Yea Obama loves walls! Wtf does this post even mean? Are you implying ISIS will come through the Mexican border?

I'm saying Obama helped other countries finance their walls. I'm saying Trump isn't the only leader of this country that thinks walls are a worthwhile investment because then why else would Obama help those countries?

[Lloyd Braun]

I'm saying Obama helped other countries finance their walls. I'm saying Trump isn't the only leader of this country that thinks walls are a worthwhile investment because then why else would Obama help those countries?

I think you are confusing border security/training and literally a wall. Which is not border security. Or any real purpose.

[Juice]

The U.S. interest in this unfettered and illegal trade has to do with immigration control. Human beings as well as cargo cross this river. But Mexico has not moved to seal this border the way the U.S. has on Mexico’s northern border with the United States.


Washington has committed at least $100 million to support Mexico’s southern border program since 2014. As of February 2016, $20 million has been delivered.

http://www.marketplace.org/2016/06/30/world/illegal-trade-thrives-along-mexicoguatemala-border


The Obama administration is spending close to a half a billion dollars to build a sophisticated electronic fence along Jordan's northern and eastern borders, a wall which US strategic planners hope will stem the flow of refugees and also wall off the increasingly important American base from the disintegration of Syria and Iraq.


It's all paid for by the United States taxpayer. The JBSP is loosely part of a wall-building program to stop weapons of mass destruction sponsored by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, focused not just on Jordan but also on the borders of Turkey, Iraq, and Lebanon. Raytheon Intelligence, Information and Services of Tucson, Arizona, a division of the Raytheon Company — one of the largest US defence companies — is the prime contractor.

https://news.vice.com/article/the-great-wall-of-jordan-how-the-us-wants-to-keep-the-islamic-state-out

[Lloyd Braun]

Is there a wall in southern Mexico that the US paid for? The answer is no. Even if there were it is comparing apples to oranges. Comparing the Mexican border to ours is not a comparison.

I also suggest you find newer sources because those are outdated.

[Emp]

Certified bonkers president. 3-5 MILLION fraudelent votes, all for Hillarx??!!!

You're the President. Even though you lost the popular vote. So do your job and lose the rabbit ears. Christ what a juvenile jackass.

[Emp]

I'm saying Obama helped other countries finance their walls. I'm saying Trump isn't the only leader of this country that thinks walls are a worthwhile investment because then why else would Obama help those countries?

WTF are you saying????? Spend 25BILLION because Obama said wha???

One stupid expensive boondoggle deserves another? This is more important than health care for our citizens?

We've lost our minds with greed and envy.

[Juice]

WTF are you saying????? Spend 25BILLION because Obama said wha???

One stupid expensive boondoggle deserves another? This is more important than health care for our citizens?

We've lost our minds with greed and envy.

No, the spending by both parties is out of control. I'm just saying that Democrats have all of a sudden acted like they give a shit about spending on federal projects and also that we have a moral responsibility to keep the borders open while Obama shut everyone else's down.

And I've said it a million times and I'll say it again, I didn't vote for Trump.

[X-band '01]

Amazing how that is exactly what Liberal Canada did. Ever drive on the fully privately funded and tollled 407 north of Toronto? Genius.

Canada got a group of investors from Mexico to build a whole new expressway north of the incredibly congested 401. And it is working beautifully. It is totally electronic toll so if you're a Yank like me, they take a pic of your license plate and send you a bill. Great highway with good design and a real time saver.

You do realize that driving on toll roads is also the go to move in NY, Chicago, New Jersey, and almost all of New England. At least with a new road funded the Canada way, there isn't a capital expenditure required from the state.

Isn't that what E-470 in Denver is like as far as camera tolls?

[xu82]

Atlanta is building an expressway parrallel to I-75 north of town. Several lanes will head south into town during morning rush hour, then change direction and head back north to get people home after work. They'll have some kind of express pass to handle how it's paid. Those hours in between, where lanes are used to go both north and south? I'm sure they are working on the details.

[bobbiemcgee]

Isn't that what E-470 in Denver is like as far as camera tolls?

Yeah, but I never use it. Costs a ton and is about 5 minutes faster to the Airport from I-25.

[X-man]

Amazing how that is exactly what Liberal Canada did. Ever drive on the fully privately funded and tollled 407 north of Toronto? Genius.

Canada got a group of investors from Mexico to build a whole new expressway north of the incredibly congested 401. And it is working beautifully. It is totally electronic toll so if you're a Yank like me, they take a pic of your license plate and send you a bill. Great highway with good design and a real time saver.

You do realize that driving on toll roads is also the go to move in NY, Chicago, New Jersey, and almost all of New England. At least with a new road funded the Canada way, there isn't a capital expenditure required from the state.

I am from New England, and that is an "alternative fact". I have no problem with toll roads, but there are very few of them in New England...anywhere. And there is no reason to have toll roads privately managed, and some good reasons not to. But this misses the point; infrastructure users should pay the costs of building and maintaining said infrastructure. That's why the Brent Spence bridge should be tolled, and why gasoline taxes should be increased to replenish the highway trust fund. Why don't Republicans see this?

[Masterofreality]

Isn't that what E-470 in Denver is like as far as camera tolls?

Was that privately funded....by investors from Mexico? Or paid out of my exorbitant Ohio tax dollars in the kitty?

[Masterofreality]

I am from New England, and that is an "alternative fact". I have no problem with toll roads, but there are very few of them in New England...anywhere. And there is no reason to have toll roads privately managed, and some good reasons not to. But this misses the point; infrastructure users should pay the costs of building and maintaining said infrastructure. That's why the Brent Spence bridge should be tolled, and why gasoline taxes should be increased to replenish the highway trust fund. Why don't Republicans see this?

Really? Uh, Mass Pike, Connecticut Tpke, almost every expressway bridge, and almost every limited access highway is tolled. WTF?

[Masterofreality]

I am from New England, and that is an "alternative fact". I have no problem with toll roads, but there are very few of them in New England...anywhere. And there is no reason to have toll roads privately managed, and some good reasons not to. But this misses the point; infrastructure users should pay the costs of building and maintaining said infrastructure. That's why the Brent Spence bridge should be tolled, and why gasoline taxes should be increased to replenish the highway trust fund. Why don't Republicans see this?

Except when the administration for the last 8 years passes a "Stimulus Package" where the money should have been spent on infrastructure, but instead was spent on stupid boondoggles that created no stimulus at all. Then still didn't put infrastructure money back out there.

[boozehound]

No, the spending by both parties is out of control. I'm just saying that Democrats have all of a sudden acted like they give a shit about spending on federal projects and also that we have a moral responsibility to keep the borders open while Obama shut everyone else's down.

And I've said it a million times and I'll say it again, I didn't vote for Trump.

I don't give a shit what Obama thinks about walls. He's not the President anymore. I do care about the guy who is the President and wants to spend what will likely amount to $30B on hastily planned border wall to prove a point and keep his poorly-informed base riled up.

Here's my thing: I don't really even care about the wall itself, I care about the $10B-$20B. If he could build the stupid wall for under $1B than I wouldn't really care because it would be an immaterial sum of money in the scope of the federal budget. We spent 8 years complaining about government waste, we finally get a 'Republican' in office, and we still want to spend money like we think it's going to rot. WTF happened to fiscal responsibility? I would expect this kind of shit from Democrats, but not Republicans.

The irony of Dems now complaining about government spending isn't lost on me, just like the irony of the Republicans now decrying obstructionist policies from a Democratic Minority isn't lost on me. This whole thing is a complete shit show, that is likely to get worse before (if) it gets better.

[Tardy Turtle]

We have always been at war with Eurasia.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

I am fine with this idea. However, if a company wants to get in the road building/toll business there can and should be no government guarantee of any acquired debt related to construction or purchase of said road/bridge. I have done some light reading already of Maquaerie or however you spell that company. I believe that is the one that is buying these assets. This company (investment fund) screams scam as some well known business insiders have stated.


Amazing how that is exactly what Liberal Canada did. Ever drive on the fully privately funded and tollled 407 north of Toronto? Genius.

Canada got a group of investors from Mexico to build a whole new expressway north of the incredibly congested 401. And it is working beautifully. It is totally electronic toll so if you're a Yank like me, they take a pic of your license plate and send you a bill. Great highway with good design and a real time saver.

You do realize that driving on toll roads is also the go to move in NY, Chicago, New Jersey, and almost all of New England. At least with a new road funded the Canada way, there isn't a capital expenditure required from the state.

[X-band '01]

Really? Uh, Mass Pike, Connecticut Tpke, almost every expressway bridge, and almost every limited access highway is tolled. WTF?

New Hampshire and Maine have tolls on their turnpikes, but Connecticut no longer does. They still have service plazas on the CT Turnpike for some reason. I'm guessing that's because CT paid off their toll road bonds like Kentucky did about 10-20 years ago - that's why tolls on Kentucky's parkways have been done away with.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

I think the idea here for tolls is they they....1 - pay for the construction of said project and 2 - pay for the maintenance. When you put it in the hands or private industry, you introduce a profit motive. What incentive is there to lower the toll once the project cost is recouped and only maintenance remains? What incentive is there to build/repair crumbing roads and bridges that aren't heavily used where the profit possibility is minimal?


New Hampshire and Maine have tolls on their turnpikes, but Connecticut no longer does. They still have service plazas on the CT Turnpike for some reason. I'm guessing that's because CT paid off their toll road bonds like Kentucky did about 10-20 years ago - that's why tolls on Kentucky's parkways have been done away with.

[Masterofreality]

I am fine with this idea. However, if a company wants to get in the road building/toll business there can and should be no government guarantee of any acquired debt related to construction or purchase of said road/bridge. I have done some light reading already of Maquaerie or however you spell that company. I believe that is the one that is buying these assets. This company (investment fund) screams scam as some well known business insiders have stated.

My initial post on who controls the 407ETR in Canada was in error. (Halfsheimers). It is actually a Spanish, not Mexican, company named Cintra Infraestructuras that has things like this all over the world. No matter, because it is a way to get infrastructure done and the actual users, rather than taxpayers who live thousands of miles away with no benefit, pay for it. Makes sense to me as a way to reduce government expenditures and deficits.

[Masterofreality]

I think the idea here for tolls is they they....1 - pay for the construction of said project and 2 - pay for the maintenance. When you put it in the hands or private industry, you introduce a profit motive. What incentive is there to lower the toll once the project cost is recouped and only maintenance remains? What incentive is there to build/repair crumbing roads and bridges that aren't heavily used where the profit possibility is minimal?

You're gonna pay one way or the other. Why not put it on the actual users and take remote taxpayers out of it? Your toll is probably less than the taxes you have to pay for it anyway.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Yours is the same company as the owner of the Toronto highway or at least they share the same parent. Do some google searches on them and their business structure. It is quite the quagmire. It is certainly a way to get stuff built, the issue is whether it's the proper way. That company looks and feels like a scam to me. It's simply too complex with what appears to be a new sub for each project.


My initial post on who controls the 407ETR in Canada was in error. (Halfsheimers). It is actually a Spanish, not Mexican, company named Cintra Infraestructuras that has things like this all over the world. No matter, because it is a way to get infrastructure done and the actual users, rather than taxpayers who live thousands of miles away with no benefit, pay for it. Makes sense to me as a way to reduce government expenditures and deficits.

[GoMuskies]

Of course they use a new sub for each project. They'd be idiots not to.

[bobbiemcgee]

The bonds issued to build the Florida turnpike were paid off in the 1980's and then it was supposed to be free. Once a toll road, always a toll rd. Politicians lie.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Google is your friend here, look specifically how they acquire debt and how they organize companies and said debt. It sounded a bit like Enron to be honest.


Of course they use a new sub for each project. They'd be idiots not to.

[Masterofreality]

Yours is the same company as the owner of the Toronto highway or at least they share the same parent. Do some google searches on them and their business structure. It is quite the quagmire. It is certainly a way to get stuff built, the issue is whether it's the proper way. That company looks and feels like a scam to me. It's simply too complex with what appears to be a new sub for each project.

I'll tell you the road is no scam....it's an advanced quality highway. Yes, built by road building subcontractors but NOT initially paid for out of a government budget.

And by the way, doesn't every state/city bid out road projects to contractors in their local area? Uh, yeah.

[GoMuskies]

Google is your friend here, look specifically how they acquire debt and how they organize companies and said debt. It sounded a bit like Enron to be honest.

Why do I need Google? Let me guess, they set up project companies and have debt that is recourse only to the relevant project companies. Welcome to project finance.

[Tardy Turtle]

We have always been at war with Eastasia.

[Caf]

We have always been at war with Eastasia.

Eastasia? Eurasia? or both?

[muskiefan82]

Eastasia? Eurasia? or both?

And Anastasia too.

[X-man]

Really? Uh, Mass Pike, Connecticut Tpke, almost every expressway bridge, and almost every limited access highway is tolled. WTF?

Other than the Mass Pike, there are virtually no tolls anywhere else in NE. And tell me where there are any bridge tolls. The Conn. River is the only major waterway with bridges, and there are no bridge tolls anywhere that I am aware of. But I'm glad to hear you support tolls. Could you tell your Tea Party friends to STFU about never tolling to pay for the Brent Spence bridge repair/replacement.

[Masterofreality]

Other than the Mass Pike, there are virtually no tolls anywhere else in NE. And tell me where there are any bridge tolls. The Conn. River is the only major waterway with bridges, and there are no bridge tolls anywhere that I am aware of. But I'm glad to hear you support tolls. Could you tell your Tea Party friends to STFU about never tolling to pay for the Brent Spence bridge repair/replacement.

I support tolls if my tax dollars aren't being confiscated by the Feds to build roads feeding Georgia growth Then charging tolls on top of that. They're now charging tolls on fast express lanes in Atlanta on top of the dollars that were spent originally.

[X-man]

I support tolls if my tax dollars aren't being confiscated by the Feds to build roads feeding Georgia growth Then charging tolls on top of that. They're now charging tolls on fast express lanes in Atlanta on top of the dollars that were spent originally.

So where do you stand on tolling for the Brent Spence?

[Caf]

True liberal...defend palestine. Ill stand with israel who is our ally or was until Obama got ahold of them.

Just curious, do you consider Mexico to be an ally?

[X-man]

I support tolls if my tax dollars aren't being confiscated by the Feds to build roads feeding Georgia growth Then charging tolls on top of that. They're now charging tolls on fast express lanes in Atlanta on top of the dollars that were spent originally.

Also, is it your position that every federal tax dollar raised in each state should be spent in that state? That would be, to say the least, an extreme minority view of what federalism means.

[X-man]

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!". Never mind.

[Juice]

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!". Never mind.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/world/americas/cuba-obama-wet-foot-dry-foot-policy.html


That being said, I don't agree with this move by Trump but let's not pretend he's the only president who has limited refugees/immigrants. As shown above with Obama, and when Obama cut off all Iraqi refugees in 2011 for 6 months.

This tweet thread is a crazy example of what we are losing https://twitter.com/dyllyp/status/825397560126824448

[Juice]

Hitler
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3yesvvYEvs

[vee4xu]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/world/americas/cuba-obama-wet-foot-dry-foot-policy.html


That being said, I don't agree with this move by Trump but let's not pretend he's the only president who has limited refugees/immigrants. As shown above with Obama, and when Obama cut off all Iraqi refugees in 2011 for 6 months.

This tweet thread is a crazy example of what we are losing https://twitter.com/dyllyp/status/825397560126824448

Fair enough. But, he is the first and only one to do it indiscriminately across the board. Others have focused on illegal hiring and immigrants who've committed crimes. But, never an across the board policy like Mr. Trump. I worry now about US citizens traveling to other countries and the possibility of being detained, arrested or jailed as a result of Mr. Trump's decision. The question I have is, how many immigrant ISIS got past security to commit crimes in our country? Seems to me that most of our tragedies have been unstable nut cases with guns, Sandy Hook, or self taught American-Muslims who were converted over the internet, Riverside, CA. I cannot think of one tragedy in our country over the past 10 years that was perpetrated by a terrorist who illegally entered the US and committed that crime. Seems that Mr. Trump is trying to solve a problem that doesn't currently exist. Further, it is a way to enact discrimination under the guise of national security. Just the opinion of a regular guy who's lived a lot of years and seen a lot.

[Juice]

Fair enough. But, he is the first and only one to do it indiscriminately across the board. Others have focused on illegal hiring and immigrants who've committed crimes. But, never an across the board policy like Mr. Trump. I worry now about US citizens traveling to other countries and the possibility of being detained, arrested or jailed as a result of Mr. Trump's decision. The question I have is, how many immigrant ISIS got past security to commit crimes in our country? Seems to me that most of our tragedies have been unstable nut cases with guns, Sandy Hook, or self taught American-Muslims who were converted over the internet, Riverside, CA. I cannot think of one tragedy in our country over the past 10 years that was perpetrated by a terrorist who illegally entered the US and committed that crime. Seems that Mr. Trump is trying to solve a problem that doesn't currently exist. Further, it is a way to enact discrimination under the guise of national security. Just the opinion of a regular guy who's lived a lot of years and seen a lot.

When Obama suspended refugee Iraqis from entering in 2011 it was because a few potential terrorists were caught before they could do any damage. But they entered using the Iraqi refugee process. http://thefederalist.com/2015/11/18/the-obama-administration-stopped-processing-iraq-refugee-requests-for-6-months-in-2011/

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-kentucky-us-dozens-terrorists-country-refugees/story?id=20931131

[Juice]

Yes this is from National Review but I think it puts this all in better perspective: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444370/donald-trump-refugee-executive-order-no-muslim-ban-separating-fact-hysteria

And here is every terror attack or plot since 9/11: http://dailysignal.com/2015/09/10/a-timeline-of-73-islamist-terror-plots-since-911/

[vee4xu]

This is perspective to my point:

And if the ban was aimed at stopping terrorism, it was oddly off target. It curiously excluded the home countries of the 9/11 hijackers: Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Since 1990, of the 182 radical Islamic terrorists who plotted attacks in the United States or on inbound airplanes, just two of them entered the U.S. as refugees.

[Caf]

When Obama suspended refugee Iraqis from entering in 2011 it was because a few potential terrorists were caught before they could do any damage. But they entered using the Iraqi refugee process. http://thefederalist.com/2015/11/18/the-obama-administration-stopped-processing-iraq-refugee-requests-for-6-months-in-2011/

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-kentucky-us-dozens-terrorists-country-refugees/story?id=20931131


Hitler
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3yesvvYEvs

Apples and oranges the size of planets. The enormous difference is the language saying the ban does not apply to minority religions in muslim countries. That's a muslim ban, no matter how you cut it. I'd really love to see evidence to the contrary.

Also, why make arguments like this?:
I don't agree with this move by Trump but let's not pretend he's the only president who has limited refugees/immigrants.

Great. Who the hell cares? Who is pretending he's the only President who has limited refugees/immigrants? Or are X-man and other posters secretly Bill Clinton and Barack Obama? Because that's the only way this statement has any relevancy.

[Juice]

Apples and oranges the size of planets. The enormous difference is the language saying the ban does not apply to minority religions in muslim countries. That's a muslim ban, no matter how you cut it. I'd really love to see evidence to the contrary.

Also, why make arguments like this?:

Great. Who the hell cares? Who is pretending he's the only President who has limited refugees/immigrants? Or are X-man and other posters secretly Bill Clinton and Barack Obama? Because that's the only way this statement has any relevancy.

Let me again preface that I do not support this executive order. I do not think it was written well, addressed the real issues, or was executed properly. That being said, my overall point is that a lot of what this order does is not much different than what previous presidents have done. Why didn't any march or protest when Obama changed our policy on Cuban refugees? Why didn't anyone march when Clinton said he wanted to secure our borders to keep illegal immigrants out? Also, this "ban" is only 120 days. I think 99% of the public thinks that it's for forever, or at least until the end of the Trump presidency. Yes those 120 days can affect a lot of lives, but people need to educate themselves before they act like they know what's going on. My overall point is that this man who they call a fascist or a Nazi is doing a lot of things that prior presidents did and no one said shit.

[Juice]

jeremy scahill ‏@jeremyscahill
Many liberals slept while Obama expanded watchlisting and violating of rights at airports. @ACLU fought it then too with little support.

jeremy scahill
‏@jeremyscahill
You may not want to hear this but when this goes to court, Trump's admin will cite not only US code, but Obama policy to defend all of this


This is another example. I agree with most of what people are protesting with all of this, but it's not consistent. People are just protesting because it's Trump and not their political god Obama.

[Juice]

In February 2016, the Obama administration added Libya, Somali and Yemen to the list of countries one could not have visited — but allowed dual citizens of those countries who had not traveled there access to the Visa Waiver Program. Dual citizens of Syria, Sudan, Iraq and Iran are still ineligible, however.
So, in a nutshell, Obama restricted visa waivers for those seven Muslim-majority countries — Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya and Yemen — and now, Trump is looking to bar immigration and visitors from the same list of countries.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/01/29/news-bulletin-the-list-of-muslim-nations-in-trumps-socalled-muslim-ban-are-ones-obama-choose-n2278021

[Juice]

Why did Obama hate Venezuelans?


I hereby find that the unrestricted immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens determined to meet one or more of the criteria in subsection 1(a) of this order would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants or nonimmigrants, of such persons, except where the Secretary of State determines that the person's entry is in the national interest of the United States. This section shall not apply to an alien if admitting the alien into the United States is necessary to permit the United States to comply with the Agreement Regarding the Headquarters of the United Nations, signed at Lake Success June 26, 1947, and entered into force November 21, 1947, or other applicable international obligations.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2015/03/11/2015-05677/blocking-property-and-suspending-entry-of-certain-persons-contributing-to-the-situation-in-venezuela

[paulxu]

This ban thing will work itself out.

I'm much more concerned about him dropping the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the Director of National Intelligence from the principles group of the National Security Council, and replacing them as standing members with Steve Bannon.

That seems crazy.

[X-man]

This ban thing will work itself out.

I'm much more concerned about him dropping the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the Director of National Intelligence from the principles group of the National Security Council, and replacing them as standing members with Steve Bannon.

That seems crazy.
I totally agree. It makes absolutely no sense given Bannon's lack of knowledge and experience.

[Strange Brew]

I totally agree. It makes absolutely no sense given Bannon's lack of knowledge and experience.

What specific knowledge and experience do you feel is missing?

[Caf]

Let me again preface that I do not support this executive order. I do not think it was written well, addressed the real issues, or was executed properly. That being said, my overall point is that a lot of what this order does is not much different than what previous presidents have done. Why didn't any march or protest when Obama changed our policy on Cuban refugees? Why didn't anyone march when Clinton said he wanted to secure our borders to keep illegal immigrants out? Also, this "ban" is only 120 days. I think 99% of the public thinks that it's for forever, or at least until the end of the Trump presidency. Yes those 120 days can affect a lot of lives, but people need to educate themselves before they act like they know what's going on. My overall point is that this man who they call a fascist or a Nazi is doing a lot of things that prior presidents did and no one said shit.

As I said before, it's the minority religion exception which is much different than what previous Presidents have done.

[Juice]

As I said before, it's the minority religion exception which is much different than what previous Presidents have done.

The countries included in his order were chosen by Obama. Syria is mentioned once in Trump's order and the other ones weren't.

Here's the text from Obama in 2015 where he names Iraq, Syria, or other area of concern. https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/158/text

And he's an update of that law in 2016 where Obama adds Libya, Somalia, and Yemen to Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Sudan. https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/02/18/dhs-announces-further-travel-restrictions-visa-waiver-program

[Caf]

The countries included in his order were chosen by Obama. Syria is mentioned once in Trump's order and the other ones weren't.

Here's the text from Obama in 2015 where he names Iraq, Syria, or other area of concern. https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/158/text

And he's an update of that law in 2016 where Obama adds Libya, Somalia, and Yemen to Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Sudan. https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/02/18/dhs-announces-further-travel-restrictions-visa-waiver-program

Yup..I got that. Let's try this one more time. It's the minority religion exception which is much different than what previous Presidents have done.


(b) Upon the resumption of USRAP admissions, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, is further directed to make changes, to the extent permitted by law, to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual's country of nationality. Where necessary and appropriate, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall recommend legislation to the President that would assist with such prioritization.


(e) Notwithstanding the temporary suspension imposed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may jointly determine to admit individuals to the United States as refugees on a case-by-case basis, in their discretion, but only so long as they determine that the admission of such individuals as refugees is in the national interest -- including when the person is a religious minority in his country of nationality facing religious persecution, when admitting the person would enable the United States to conform its conduct to a preexisting international agreement, or when the person is already in transit and denying admission would cause undue hardship -- and it would not pose a risk to the security or welfare of the United States.

It doesn't take a law degree to understand that exempting people who are of a minority religion in a Muslim country is the same as banning Muslims. I almost wish he had the courage to just call it what it is.

[Juice]

Yup..I got that. Let's try this one more time. It's the minority religion exception which is much different than what previous Presidents have done.





It doesn't take a law degree to understand that exempting people who are of a minority religion in a Muslim country is the same as banning Muslims. I almost wish he had the courage to just call it what it is.

No it's not. It's prioritizing Christians, Jews, and Yazidis who are persecuted in those 7 countries.

[xu82]

No it's not. It's prioritizing Christians, Jews, and Yazidis who are persecuted in those 7 countries.

How can we trust a man in Pantaloons? :wacko:

[Juice]

How can we trust a man in Pantaloons? :wacko:

Haha, I thought the Live Chat was a trust tree.

[xu82]

Haha, I thought the Live Chat was a trust tree.


Damn safe places! I deleted it (really) but your post remains. TAKE THAT! Now I'm just going to make shit up about your matching bunny slippers!

[xu82]

Hey, and I thought you were a lawyer! Who the hell does a lawyer trust? Have you learned nothing? :happy:

[D-West & PO-Z]

http://nypost.com/2017/01/29/american-basketball-players-stranded-in-middle-east-after-bans/

[GoMuskies]

http://nypost.com/2017/01/29/american-basketball-players-stranded-in-middle-east-after-bans/

How can Americans play for Iranian teams anyway? Would seem to be a sanctions issue. They must get paid by foreign (outside Iran) banks.

If you've got to be stranded, Dubai isn't an awful place to be stranded.

[Juice]

Yup..I got that. Let's try this one more time. It's the minority religion exception which is much different than what previous Presidents have done.





It doesn't take a law degree to understand that exempting people who are of a minority religion in a Muslim country is the same as banning Muslims. I almost wish he had the courage to just call it what it is.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/world/middleeast/isis-genocide-yazidi-un.html

[SemajParlor]

No it's not. It's prioritizing Christians, Jews, and Yazidis who are persecuted in those 7 countries.

How long have you been a fan of X, Ms Conway?

[SemajParlor]

No it's not. It's prioritizing Christians, Jews, and Yazidis who are persecuted in those 7 countries.

You're give these fascist imbeciles too much credit, Juice. http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/real-time/Rudy-Giuliani-President-Trump-asked-me-to-create-a-legal-Muslim-ban-.html?mobi=true

[Caf]

No it's not. It's prioritizing Christians, Jews, and Yazidis who are persecuted in those 7 countries.

You forgot to put a "wink-wink" at the end of that sentence. Are any Muslims persecuted by terror groups?

This is actually the most ludicrous spin of this I've seen yet. Stick with "making America safe".

[boozehound]

This quote is potentially problematic as far as it 'not being a Muslim ban' goes.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316726-giuliani-trump-asked-me-how-to-do-a-muslim-ban-legally

This EO, in my opinion, also gives us a glimpse into just how comically inept this administration is. The fact that they rolled this out without vetting it in such a way that it left green card holders stranded at airports makes no sense to me. I don't understand what would be 'in it' for them. The only conclusion that I can reach is that it was a massive oversight the gave the opposition a significant amount of political capital and accomplished nothing for the Trump administration. A more reasonable EO would not have generated nearly this much fervor, IMHO.

[muskiefan82]

It's called "Government by Impulse" and is going to be as costly to the U.S. as those impulse buys at the store are to each of us.

[spursy]

My first foray into this bizarre thread. Just thought I would leave this tidbit here. https://twitter.com/XavierUniv/status/825870026439847936

Proud of our university.

[Juice]

You're give these fascist imbeciles too much credit, Juice. http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/real-time/Rudy-Giuliani-President-Trump-asked-me-to-create-a-legal-Muslim-ban-.html?mobi=true

They're imbeciles I'll agree on that. I just don't see how they differ from the previous presidency all that much though.

[LA Muskie]

It doesn't take a law degree to understand that exempting people who are of a minority religion in a Muslim country is the same as banning Muslims. I almost wish he had the courage to just call it what it is.

He doesn't. But apparently Giuliani does.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Muskie]

No it's not. It's prioritizing Christians, Jews, and Yazidis who are persecuted in those 7 countries.

So suddenly Republicans are pro Affirmative Action concepts. But only for refugees.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Juice]

So suddenly Republicans are pro Affirmative Action concepts. But only for refugees.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes because victims of genocide are the same as college acceptance rates.

[boozehound]

They're imbeciles I'll agree on that. I just don't see how they differ from the previous presidency all that much though.

There seems to be an increasingly insular and authoritarian bent to this regime that I didn't get from the Obama administration, or any previous administration (I wasn't alive for Nixon). Also remember that Republicans are supposed to be less authoritarian and more concerned with individual freedoms and state's rights than the Democrats.

The tone of the rhetoric is far different this time around, which makes the whole thing feel a lot more authoritarian than any president I can recall. I don't recall Obama, or Bush for that matter, yelling at CNN that they are fake news and refusing to answer questions, or aggressively denying provable facts. Repeatedly. Then sending his press secretary out to do the same thing.

This is not normal, and considered in it's totality I don't think it's on par with any previous administration, even if individual pieces of it may be. This is an unbalanced man with unbalanced, and often incompetent, people advising him. This jackoff is too busy obsessing over the size of the crowd at his inauguration to properly draft a clear and enforceable executive order. We chose literally the worst option possible this election cycle, with the possible exception of Jill Stein.

[Caf]

There seems to be an increasingly insular and authoritarian bent to this regime that I didn't get from the Obama administration, or any previous administration (I wasn't alive for Nixon). Also remember that Republicans are supposed to be less authoritarian and more concerned with individual freedoms and state's rights than the Democrats.

The tone of the rhetoric is far different this time around, which makes the whole thing feel a lot more authoritarian than any president I can recall. I don't recall Obama, or Bush for that matter, yelling at CNN that they are fake news and refusing to answer questions, or aggressively denying provable facts. Repeatedly. Then sending his press secretary out to do the same thing.

This is not normal, and considered in it's totality I don't think it's on par with any previous administration, even if individual pieces of it may be. This is an unbalanced man with unbalanced, and often incompetent, people advising him. This jackoff is too busy obsessing over the size of the crowd at his inauguration to properly draft a clear and enforceable executive order. We chose literally the worst option possible this election cycle, with the possible exception of Jill Stein.

I would be very careful about labeling what is going on as incompetence. That is too convenient. Steve Bannon is operating very purposefully and intelligently towards what he wants to achieve.

[boozehound]

I would be very careful about labeling what is going on as incompetence. That is too convenient. Steve Bannon is operating very purposefully and intelligently towards what he wants to achieve.

Maybe, but some of these things seem to only be explainable as incompetence. Steve Bannon may be an evil genius, but a lot of the rank and file surrounding Trump, and Trump himself, are providing a lot of evidence that they might just be idiots.

I'm not fully ready to sign off on Bannon as some sort of cartoonish super villain, but even if he is, his henchmen are total morons.

For example - what is the possible positive outcome of issuing an immigration ban on Muslims but failing to include current green card holders, etc? The only thing I can possibly think of (outside of incompetence) is that it is designed to test the strength of the backlash? Generally when you move toward authoritarianism and start rolling back people's civil rights you want to do so as quietly as possible so as not to generate unrest.

[SemajParlor]

Yes because victims of genocide are the same as college acceptance rates.


Haha, yeah I’m not sure if party line jabs need to be made at this point in time. Personally I’ve been past that point for a while now. I think it’s important that we collectively realize what we have going on here.

[Juice]

There seems to be an increasingly insular and authoritarian bent to this regime that I didn't get from the Obama administration, or any previous administration (I wasn't alive for Nixon). Also remember that Republicans are supposed to be less authoritarian and more concerned with individual freedoms and state's rights than the Democrats.

The tone of the rhetoric is far different this time around, which makes the whole thing feel a lot more authoritarian than any president I can recall. I don't recall Obama, or Bush for that matter, yelling at CNN that they are fake news and refusing to answer questions, or aggressively denying provable facts. Repeatedly. Then sending his press secretary out to do the same thing.

This is not normal, and considered in it's totality I don't think it's on par with any previous administration, even if individual pieces of it may be. This is an unbalanced man with unbalanced, and often incompetent, people advising him. This jackoff is too busy obsessing over the size of the crowd at his inauguration to properly draft a clear and enforceable executive order. We chose literally the worst option possible this election cycle, with the possible exception of Jill Stein.

And I completely agree with that. None of this is being done in conjunction with Congress (since they're too cowardly to say anything regardless). But earlier visa bans and travel bans by Obama were done with executive orders too and no Democrats said shit. And let's also not pretend that Democrats all of a sudden give a shit about limited government and checks on federal power. I actually do which is why I voted for Gary Johnson in this election. I know he wasn't an ideal candidate but he best represented my views, especially compared to Trump who isn't a Republic and could tell he was going to increase (or definitely not decrease) the size of the federal government. But what I despise most is people suddenly giving a shit about what a president can and cannot do when Obama abused that power for years.

[boozehound]

Haha, yeah I’m not sure if party line jabs need to be made at this point in time. Personally I’ve been past that point for a while now. I think it’s important that we collectively realize what we have going on here.

I agree. I'm getting very uncomfortable with a lot of this. It seems that the more 'mainstream' people around this administration may have limited influence.

Removing the Chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and replacing them with Steve Bannon on the National Security Council is a big deal. Here is a pretty center-cut Business Insider article outlining some of the moves.

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-steve-bannon-national-security-council-2017-1

I really hope that we, as a Country, are ready to squash this thing when it goes over the line because it's heading there fast. Foreign policy and National Security are serious things that have very real consequences that are often measured in human lives. This is not funny anymore.

[boozehound]

And I completely agree with that. None of this is being done in conjunction with Congress (since they're too cowardly to say anything regardless). But earlier visa bans and travel bans by Obama were done with executive orders too and no Democrats said shit. And let's also not pretend that Democrats all of a sudden give a shit about limited government and checks on federal power. I actually do which is why I voted for Gary Johnson in this election. I know he wasn't an ideal candidate but he best represented my views, especially compared to Trump who isn't a Republic and could tell he was going to increase (or definitely not decrease) the size of the federal government. But what I despise most is people suddenly giving a shit about what a president can and cannot do when Obama abused that power for years.

Fair enough. I think one of the key differences may be that Obama didn't talk and act like a crazy person. If it was Jeb Bush doing this shit I think there would be a lot less concern all around. It probably also would have been done in a more measured manner and clearly explained to people to avoid the spectacle of people with current visas being turned away or detained at airports, which is also a significant difference between how Obama handled this vs. how Trump is handling it.

At the end of the day I don't give a shit about party affiliation. I don't think I've ever voted across the board one way or another on a ballot, and I have voted for presidential candidates from 3 different parties. I do care about the overall health of our Republic, and I think the Trump administration appears to represent a significant threat to it. It's a fair point that a lot of liberals tolerated things from Obama that they aren't tolerating from Trump, but I think there are some key differences there that make me more concerned with limiting this lunatic's power than worry about consistently applied logic.

[paulxu]

I think this conservative from the Bush administration has a pretty good handle on what we are facing.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/a-clarifying-moment-in-american-history/514868/?utm_source=hpfb

[boozehound]

I think this conservative from the Bush administration has a pretty good handle on what we are facing.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/a-clarifying-moment-in-american-history/514868/?utm_source=hpfb

Seems pretty spot on to me. I think we are standing on the precipice of an important moment in United States history. I wish I was more confident about how this whole thing is going to end. Hopefully we can depose him before he does too much lasting damage.

[LA Muskie]

Yes because victims of genocide are the same as college acceptance rates.
I'm all for supporting and protecting victims of genocide. ALL of them. Not just the Christians.

[Juice]

Chuck Schumer is a Nazi http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/260471-schumer-refugee-pause-may-be-necessary#.WI-Plx5bF60.twitter

[Caf]

Chuck Schumer is a Nazi http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/260471-schumer-refugee-pause-may-be-necessary#.WI-Plx5bF60.twitter

I must have missed where Schumer said a Muslim pause may be necessary.

[Caf]

And I completely agree with that. None of this is being done in conjunction with Congress (since they're too cowardly to say anything regardless). But earlier visa bans and travel bans by Obama were done with executive orders too and no Democrats said shit. And let's also not pretend that Democrats all of a sudden give a shit about limited government and checks on federal power. I actually do which is why I voted for Gary Johnson in this election. I know he wasn't an ideal candidate but he best represented my views, especially compared to Trump who isn't a Republic and could tell he was going to increase (or definitely not decrease) the size of the federal government. But what I despise most is people suddenly giving a shit about what a president can and cannot do when Obama abused that power for years.

Just wanted to remind you that the difference is the minority religion language. Which is quite literally the difference between banning people of a state and people of a religion. Oh, and I know you're concerned about genocide victims, so just wanted to let you know that more Muslims have been killed by ISIS than any other religion, especially the Shiites.

[paulxu]

I'm an idiot, but I don't understand the reasoning.

If you wanted to keep the country safe, and were worried about terrorists coming into the country, why do you stop people from 7 countries whose people have never committed a terrorist act in America?
Why wouldn't you stop the people from countries who have exhibited such a threat...like Saudi Arabia?

That's (hopefully) a serious question. (Save the snarky remarks about Trump not having business in those countries, while he does in others)

[GoMuskies]

Saudi Arabia is an ally. Maybe a shitty ally, but an ally nonetheless. We have military bases in KSA and many business interests there that are not Trump's. We cannot really screw with them unless we just want to completely alienate EVERYONE from that part of the world. No administration has labeled KSA as a state sponsor of terror, and Trump's not going to start now unless he's an idiot. Err...an even bigger idiot than we think already.

[bobbiemcgee]

Yeah, but we could take their oil.....

[GoMuskies]

Yeah, but we could take their oil.....

Hell, we never even took Iraq's oil. I mean, if we were going to fuck everything up so badly, we should have at least paid ourselves in crude! Couldn't have turned out any worse.

[94GRAD]

Hell, we never even took Iraq's oil. I mean, if we were going to fuck everything up so badly, we should have at least paid ourselves in crude! Couldn't have turned out any worse.

Black Gold, Texas Tea!

[SemajParlor]

Hell, we never even took Iraq's oil. I mean, if we were going to fuck everything up so badly, we should have at least paid ourselves in crude! Couldn't have turned out any worse.

The biggest case for not believing in any of those inside jobs / largely orchestrated government conspiracies is this reason. The people in charge are usually not very good at being competent.

[Juice]

I'm an idiot, but I don't understand the reasoning.

If you wanted to keep the country safe, and were worried about terrorists coming into the country, why do you stop people from 7 countries whose people have never committed a terrorist act in America?
Why wouldn't you stop the people from countries who have exhibited such a threat...like Saudi Arabia?

That's (hopefully) a serious question. (Save the snarky remarks about Trump not having business in those countries, while he does in others)

Obama picked those 7 countries. They were named in two different executive orders by him in 2014 and 2015. Trump didn't even refer to those 7 countries in his executive order. He just cited the orders from Obama.

That being Saudi Arabia is a country that might be more insane than a lot of those seven.

[Juice]

Just wanted to remind you that the difference is the minority religion language. Which is quite literally the difference between banning people of a state and people of a religion. Oh, and I know you're concerned about genocide victims, so just wanted to let you know that more Muslims have been killed by ISIS than any other religion, especially the Shiites.

This is an real question that I don't know the answer to. Do Shiites count as a minority religion if Sunnis outnumber them? Or vica versa?

I do think Christians, Yazidis, and Jews should be given some special consideration. And not because I hate Muslims or think they're all evil but just because they're so outnumber those 3 minority religions in the region. In 2016 when Obama really upped the amount of refugees, only 1% of those allowed in were Christian although they make up about 5-10% of the population in Syria. Now I don't know if Syrian Christians simply didn't try to come here but there has to be some explanation. And to counter myself, more Christians are traditionally let in than Muslims so I don't know if this was a way to even it out or simply based on the turmoil in the Middle East.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/10/05/u-s-admits-record-number-of-muslim-refugees-in-2016/

[Juice]

I think everyone can get behind this: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/us/politics/obama-trump-protections-lgbt-workers.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share

[Caf]

This is an real question that I don't know the answer to. Do Shiites count as a minority religion if Sunnis outnumber them? Or vica versa?

I do think Christians, Yazidis, and Jews should be given some special consideration. And not because I hate Muslims or think they're all evil but just because they're so outnumber those 3 minority religions in the region. In 2016 when Obama really upped the amount of refugees, only 1% of those allowed in were Christian although they make up about 5-10% of the population in Syria. Now I don't know if Syrian Christians simply didn't try to come here but there has to be some explanation. And to counter myself, more Christians are traditionally let in than Muslims so I don't know if this was a way to even it out or simply based on the turmoil in the Middle East.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/10/05/u-s-admits-record-number-of-muslim-refugees-in-2016/

You'd have to ask the Trumpster.

[Pete Delkus]

Can someone who is strongly against the immigration policy Trump put forward, explain how Obama's Cuba edict this month is vastly different?

In an effort to "normalize" relationships with this dictatorship, Obama acquiesced to Cuba leadership and abandoned our policy in assisting refugees...I'm in a "need to learn" mode - thanks for the help.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/01/14/obamas-cruel-policy-reversal-on-cuban-refugees/?utm_term=.cffd895d3793

[Caf]

Can someone who is strongly against the immigration policy Trump put forward, explain how Obama's Cuba edict this month is vastly different?

In an effort to "normalize" relationships with this dictatorship, Obama acquiesced to Cuba leadership and abandoned our policy in assisting refugees...I'm in a "need to learn" mode - thanks for the help.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/01/14/obamas-cruel-policy-reversal-on-cuban-refugees/?utm_term=.cffd895d3793

Obama's policy change was applicable to all Cuban refugees. Trump's allows discretion on the basis of religion.

Also, are you assuming that everyone who's against Trump's policy is pro Obama's? It's possible to be against both. I am.

[Pete Delkus]

Obama's policy change was applicable to all Cuban refugees. Trump's allows discretion on the basis of religion.

Also, are you assuming that everyone who's against Trump's policy is pro Obama's? It's possible to be against both. I am.

The Trump administration would argue that its not based on religion, pointing to the largest Muslim country - Indonesia- and many other Muslim countries are not included. However, I did quickly hear something about Trump said about Christians and preferences...if this I said true, I grant you that's this is inconsistent and wrong.


The partisan selective outrage is a massive part of our domestics devide. I commend you for being consistent.

[Caf]

The Trump administration would argue that its not based on religion, pointing to the largest Muslim country - Indonesia- and many other Muslim countries are not included. However, I did quickly hear something about Trump said about Christians and preferences...if this I said true, I grant you that's this is inconsistent and wrong.


The partisan selective outrage is a massive part of our domestics devide. I commend you for being consistent.

I think you're mistaken. The reason it has religious discretion is that the ban can be lifted for people of a minority religion. The issue is not about the countries targeted but about the people targeted.

My stance is nothing commendable. Shutting off travel from countries is quite ordinary, and arguably useful. Doing it with a religious slant is too far, and hindering refugees is cruel in my opinion. Refugees are the most desperate of the desperate and the process is already incredibly thorough. If you want to make it tougher, fine, but lives are at risk everyday the refugee system is halted.

[Chris Knight]

Can someone who is strongly against the immigration policy Trump put forward, explain how Obama's Cuba edict this month is vastly different?

In an effort to "normalize" relationships with this dictatorship, Obama acquiesced to Cuba leadership and abandoned our policy in assisting refugees...I'm in a "need to learn" mode - thanks for the help.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/01/14/obamas-cruel-policy-reversal-on-cuban-refugees/?utm_term=.cffd895d3793

The wet-foot dry-foot policy also incentivized people to basically risk their lives to make it to American shores. Untold loss of life happened in the Straits of Florida because of it. Normalizing the policy lets the US do organized vetting, just like we do with other countries.

And having spent some time in Cuba recently, I can tell you that while it's a long way off from being an "open society", it's not nearly as bad for the average person as it used to be, economically and politically. A far cry from the chaos of countries like Syria and Iraq.

[SemajParlor]

I think everyone can get behind this: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/us/politics/obama-trump-protections-lgbt-workers.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share

FAILING NEW YORK TIMES! Don't read --- very unfair. Sad!