192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
Frugal1
 
  -2  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 08:03 am
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3VyAd2WQAEjtPc.jpg
Frugal1
 
  -1  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 08:05 am
@hightor,
Do your own homework - start with O-boy's publicized plan to withdraw from Iraq...
0 Replies
 
Frugal1
 
  -2  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 08:06 am
At the airports, they're actually protesting Obama's 2009 refugee ban which was the same as Trump's, the protestors are just arriving late.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  0  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 08:45 am
You still da King Frug.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 08:45 am
Quote:
Facing intense criticism, some Republicans are speaking out against Trump’s refugee ban. Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell aren’t among them.
WP
Christians are the most moral politicians.
Frugal1
 
  -1  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 08:51 am
@blatham,
The criticism isn't intense.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -1  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 08:51 am
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

gungasnake wrote:

Nail-theAss Tyson is a poster child for the yuppifaction of science.


No. You don't get to poke fun at actual scientists. You can disagree with them all day long, but that's childish.


Disagree. When someone who proposes to be a scientist is noted more for his political activism then for real science, he is fair game.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 08:52 am
Quote:
THE EXECUTIVE ORDER that President Trump signed on Friday calling a temporary halt to travel to the United States from seven predominantly Muslim nations — and indefinitely blocking refugees from the world’s largest humanitarian crisis, in Syria—is an affront to values upon which the nation was founded and that have made it a beacon of hope around the world. George Washington declared in 1783 that the “bosom of America is open” not only to the “opulent and respectable stranger” but also “the oppressed and persecuted.” Now Mr. Trump has slammed the door on the oppressed and persecuted in a fit of irrational xenophobia.
WP Editorial

It is looking to me like Trump is placing domestic policies in the hands of Pence and foreign affairs/national security in the hands of Bannon. What could go wrong?
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  0  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 08:54 am
@dlowan,
dlowan wrote:

This constant stream of executive orders......can Trump keep reversing policy like this? Do these fiats later get to be debated in congress and can they be overturned?


Ask Obama.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  0  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 08:58 am
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

Congress can contradict an EO but the president must sign it or veto it. If he vetoes it, Congress must get enough votes to override.

My concern with this guy is, When his term is up (Or he gets voted out in his first term) will he follow the "peaceful transfer of power" precedent which identifies our Republic.





No. He will surround the white house with loyalists of the 82nd Airborne and stay hold up in there indefinitely.

Oh...Yours was a serious question?
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  0  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 08:59 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Trump puts himself into a bad light by his bigotry.


So do you.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  0  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 09:01 am
@TomTomBinks,
TomTomBinks wrote:

Quote:
That describes O-boy, and he's history.

Frug, he's gone. Give it up. Try to say something relevant.


Obammy is gone?? Oh really. He's just on vacation...Wait for it.
0 Replies
 
Frugal1
 
  -1  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 09:10 am
Why Wouldn't a Nation Not Want to Ban People That Would Gladly Behead You & Your Child?
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  0  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 09:10 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Comes from the top; Trump is too ignorant to understand our Constitution, and that our country is the conglomeration of people from all over the world. We are all immigrants except for the Native Indians. Go back far enough in human history, and they may have come from Asia.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/11/131120-science-native-american-people-migration-siberia-genetics/


No...The indians are immigrants too. They just came here a very long time ago when there wasn't any immigration officials around
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  1  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 09:17 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

By Darren Samuelsohn.
[quote]“Impeachment” is already on the lips of pundits, newspaper editorials, constitutional scholars, and even a few members of Congress. From the right, Washington attorney Bruce Fein puts the odds at 50/50 that a President Trump commits impeachable offenses as president. Liberal Florida Rep. Alan Grayson says Trump’s insistence on building a wall at the U.S.-Mexico border, if concrete was poured despite Congress’s opposition, could lead down a path toward impeachment. Even the mainstream Republican head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce recently tossed out the I-word when discussing the civilian backlash if Trump’s trade war with China led to higher prices on everyday items sold at WalMart and Target.

[/quote]

Apparently the left realizes that there is no hope to find somebody who'll able to run against and beat Donald Trump in the next election. This is evidence by the fact that they are pinning their hopes on an impeachment process which could take almost as long. It would seem to me the quickest way to remove Donald Trump from office would be to beat him in the next election.

Silly leftists.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  0  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 09:19 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Good. Trump thinks he can run our country like a king. He's going to learn quickly that the legal community in this country is going to fight this bigot all the way to the Supreme Court.


A Trump court...LOL.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 09:25 am
More than 250,000 Britons with dual citizenship are set to be affected by Donald Trump's travel ban. (That's only those who were born in Iraq, Iran and Somalia. I couldn't find numbers for the other countries.)

Quote:
http://i67.tinypic.com/2znspqr.jpg
giujohn
 
  1  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 09:25 am
@RABEL222,
RABEL222 wrote:

I have supported the ACLU for years. But than I have been a cheese eater for 81 years.


Well that answers alot. Any one who eats that much cheese would be full of **** for lack of a proper bowel movement.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 10:13 am
This one is interesting
Quote:
Tierney SneedVerified account
‏@Tierney_Megan
Tierney Sneed Retweeted Tierney Sneed
FWIW an GOPer at retreat this week corrected me when I said "Obamacare" and told me they want to stick to calling it "Affordable Care Act"

Previously of course, ACA was not the preferred term. Obamacare was used almost without fail by Republicans. So why this shift?

As with the even earlier use of "Hillarycare", the goal was to personalize the program, to make it easier to carry forward the notion that it was a sort of totalitarian/authoritarian project (as in the constant "shoved down our throats" by this woman or this guy language). And also it facilitated the trick of shifting bad feelings they had already promoted about the person on to the program itself:
Obama = bad
Therefore, Obama (anything) = bad (anything)

But now they evidently see a need to purposefully change how they are using language, to try and remove "Obama" as a referent. The reason looks to be a mix of related concerns:

First, they've seen the same polls we've seen showing that significant majorities of citizens do not want to lose many recently gained health insurance benefits that came as a consequence of Obamacare/ACA and don't want a repeal of the act (undoubtedly their own polls verify this problem). They know that if they were to repeal it, many of their own base would be unhappy with the personal/family consequences.

So, they understand they are probably going to have to keep the act in place or at least the main body of it with little change or face significant electoral damage. But they will also want to market all this with the over-riding deceit that small changes are huge and constitute a far better Republican plan - this isn't the ACA/Obamacare, it's something totally other.

Why remove Obama's name? To help forward the deceit noted above. Also, they would prefer citizens to not think about Obama when they enjoy their new health advantages. They wouldn't want to have citizens recognizing who actually authored this act - if that author is a Democrat/liberal. Also, they surely know the polls on Obama's popularity and they don't want that going higher. So they have to shift language now.

Quote:
“We’d better be sure that we’re prepared to live with the market we’ve created” through repeal, Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) said, according to the Post. “That’s going to be called Trumpcare. Republicans will own that lock, stock and barrel, and we’ll be judged in the election less than two years away.”
TPM



blatham
 
  2  
Sun 29 Jan, 2017 10:15 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Yup. And that's just Brits.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.5 seconds on 07/07/2025 at 06:20:17